David,

I agree as well.

I think that linen backing is a real plus for rare posters and even not so
rare. Time is not going to help any poster. If you linen back a rare poster
it is some what locked into the condition of the time and if restoration is
needed it will be less than at a future date would require if not linen
backed. When I sold the Grand Hotel through Grey at Heritage, there was no
discussion of what would be best to do as far as linen backing. It was just
assumed it was a must to linen back even though the original wasn't that bad
(a couple of chips and sight damage in one corner). I really don't see what
the problem is when a piece meant to be thrown away after a few weeks on
display is preserved to last as long as possible. I am a relatively a new
small time collector/dealer, but prefer linen backing and it seems that high
end collectors do as well. If someone like Doug pipes in and says he wants
all natural then I might think differently. I will linen back posters as I
can afford and make economic sense and to market them through Bruce, Grey,
MPB or my eBay account. 

Cheers,
Brek

-----Original Message-----
From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark
Stewart
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 7:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MOPO] A shift in thinking, linen-backing & slabbing?

Aloha MoPo,

David,
I could not agree with you more!!!!!!!!

Best,
Mark



--- David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> ** I grow tired of pupils from the "no
> linen-backing, no restoration" school 
> applying their "rules" to larger "art" items like
> movie paper filled with 
> acid.  This is a zero-tolerance attitude that feels
> TOO absolute.  If you 
> collect antiquarian hardbacks, comic books or
> magazines, you can't restore 
> without hurting value.  But what good is owning
> larger movie paper that will 
> crack or crumble to dust even if handled with latex
> gloves?
> 
> ** We're not talking about furniture or a Tiffany
> lamp whose value plunges 
> after its "patina" is cleaned off or "restored." 
> Parchment lasts longer, 
> but it isn't paper.  The life span of paper
> decorated with colored inks is 
> near zero by comparison.  As I've said before, for
> some people, presentation 
> is everything.  To me, there's nothing wrong about
> linen- or paper-backing 
> items that will extend its life and make 'em look
> better with a few minor 
> touch-ups.  Slabbing would drive me out of the hobby
> because you can't 
> display slabbed posters and it opens up a can of
> worms about UV and fading 
> and other crap.  Besides, Rich is correct.  Poster
> collectors are a tiny 
> bunch that wouldn't fill a nice-sized yacht.  It'd
> take an ocean liner to 
> accommodate the number of comic and coin collectors
> who live in the USA 
> alone.
> 
> ** Look at how museum curators in NY or SFO treat
> their paintings and 
> drawings and even movie paper.  In some cases,
> they're looking at 
> preservation AND restoration.  Without restoration,
> Vermeer's "Girl with a 
> Pearl Earring," Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" or
> Rembrandt's "Night Watch" would be 
> non-existent today or display with many flakes of
> pigment missing.  There's 
> controversy about restoring frescoes like
> Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel, but 
> less debate about restoring framed art.  So when I
> hear people declare that 
> movie paper restoration is "illogical" -- I respond
> with this:  IF restoring 
> art on canvas, a material MORE more durable than an
> acid-filled poster -- is 
> embraced by museum curators, than WHY NOT framed
> paper as well, so long as 
> it's NOT over done?  For ex., at the Museum of
> Modern Art in NYC, there are 
> several three-sheets on display.  They're
> linen-backed and not over painted. 
>   At the Academy Awards' corporate offices on
> Wilshire Blvd., there are a 
> mix of linen-backed/restored and unrestored posters
> also on display.  Some 
> I've seen even look dry mounted on foam core.
> 
> ** I prefer unrestored paper, but I've got NO
> problems buying vintage 
> posters backed and "touched up" so long I know what
> was done, as now 
> practiced by Bruce and Heritage.  Yet some declare
> sacrilegious -- the 
> practice of de-acidifying, cleaning, backing and
> conservatively restoring 
> old movie paper.  They insist flaws ADD "character."
>  ADD what?  Flaws can 
> underline how old a poster is, and in some cases,
> they may add "charm," 
> whatever that subjective word means.  But the type
> of flaws on a poster -- 
> and how many -- will determine whether anything can
> be ADDED and PUSHED into 
> the "plus" side of the column while judging the sum
> total of a poster's 
> sentimental or $$$ value.
> 
> ** Yet I know people who will "die on the hill" --
> declaring tears, folds, 
> stains, creases aren't "really" defects -- IF a
> poster is at least (fill in 
> the blank) years old.  Well, I won't display an
> unrestored insert on paper 
> or linen that's crinkled and looks like it was
> sprayed with rust water.  
> "Rust" and about 30 tape stains and crinkle "chunks"
> may ADD "character" -- 
> but at what point do they transform a poster into a
> large and brittle 
> newspaper with colored inks -- held together by
> linen with zero touch-ups?  
> The reason I think collecting newspapers and pulp
> magazines is mostly 
> inexpensive is because the acid has turned 'em into
> yellowed crap and few 
> exist, defect-free, despite being printed by the
> thousands.  I collect 'em 
> for historical reasons, but I won't display 'em.
> 
> ** I agree bad restoration of an old poster is more
> horrific than leaving 
> that same poster untouched.  But in my view, there
> will ALWAYS be a need for 
> great poster restorers.  So any effort to start a
> tidal wave against 
> restoration of movie posters -- will always be a
> non-starter for me.
> 
> -koose.
> 
>          Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at
> www.filmfan.com
>   
>
___________________________________________________________________
>               How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo
> Mailing List
>                                     
>        Send a message addressed to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>             In the BODY of your message type:
> SIGNOFF MOPO-L
>                                     
>     The author of this message is solely responsible
> for its content.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

         Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
   ___________________________________________________________________
              How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
                                    
       Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
                                    
    The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

         Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
   ___________________________________________________________________
              How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
                                    
       Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
                                    
    The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

Reply via email to