I didn't think "very good" was speaking that highly of it.
But I've had another look, you're right, I probably over graded,
"good" then.
But what was that Rear Window 3 sht from a few weeks back on the
recreation grading scale?
Below "poor" surely?
"Discraceful", "hilarious"?
But to be fair, do we know when this was done, and how good the
reference was that the artist had?
Should have done a lot better if they had something as good as the
Heritage title card scan.
But, what's painted reaction good for now, other than honesty?
On 30 Aug 2009, at 20:52, James Richard wrote:
Actually, it's only "very good" as artwork, not as reproduction. In
fact, I tip my hat to the artist who did the in-painting for being
an honest and honorable person. Here's why: It is obvious he was
talented enough to accurately reproduce the actor's expressions from
the title card if he had wanted to. And he clearly had the original
title car to work from. He deliberately chose to put different,
vapid expressions on the faces of the actors so that anyone who knew
their stuff would immediately recognize that the in-painting was in
fact a not-totally-accurate reproduction. As his final statement to
that effect, look at the line that says "Based on the story by": In
the genuine title card that line is written in both upper and
lowercase letters. In the recreated in-painting on the half sheet
that line is in ALL UPPERCASE letters! The artist very clearly did
things that screamed to any knowledgeable person "this is not
exactly like the original, this is a recreation".
-- JR
Richard Evans wrote:
I'm pretty fussy, but I think it's a very good job considering it's
painted.
It just pales in comparison to the best way to restore lost
sections, using good quality scans from complete examples.
But perhaps now, that isn't the best course of action.
On 30 Aug 2009, at 00:19, Douglas Ball wrote:
Side by side, yes, but when the auction took place it looked damn
good!
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: JOHN REID Vintage Movie Memorabilia
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from Heritage
There is indeed a very big difference between the two.
Sign up for my regular newsletter on movie memorabilia:
http://www.moviemem.com/pages/page.php?mod=account&go=register
Visit my Website: www.moviemem.com
All About Australian posters:
http://search.reviews.ebay.com/members/johnwr_W0QQuqtZg
My eBay Store and Lisitngs: http://myworld.ebay.com/johnwr/
Exhibitions: http://www.moviemem.com/pages/page.php?page=15
JOHN REID VINTAGE MOVIE MEMORABILIA
PO Box 92
Palm Beach
Qld 4221
Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: jeff po
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 8:40 AM
Subject: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from Heritage
Since phil had given the description of the half sheet that
heritage auctioned for 23,500.00, i though it interesting to show
the "paint re-creation" up close, on that poster. i also am
showing the way the art/photo appears from the TC, as the artwork
was the same. the painted re-creation is not very good. all 4
actors' depictions are off and rather simplistic in appearance.
This can be seen more readily when comparing side by side (or up
and down).
jeff
TC:
Half Sheet:
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.
