I did want to add a point to confirm JR's comments and Diane's comment
about the "fuzziness" on the back of the poster. For many years, collectors
would have posters drymounted to pull out the fold lines. When poster values
began to climb and drymounting was not longer a suggested method, many
collectors began to bring their posters to be to have unmounted and
linenbacked. That process often includes pulling the back layers of the
mounting board off as close to the layer of the original poster as possible.
What is left is a fuzzy backing because it is theoretically the interior of the
mounting board with is pulp. At that point, as Diane points out, either water
or a bestine based product is put on the back of that mounting board to release
the original poster. At that point the glue that was used for mounting is
cleaned off the back of the poster and then linenbacked or, as I have had in
some cases, refolded up for storage (not my suggestion as the fluid used to
de-mount the poster has left that poster somewhat wrinkled. Some people just
don't want to spend the money linenbacking at the time).
So, when Diane mentioned last week about the "fuzzy" backing, that is
when I suggested that the Dracula may be a S2 poster where the top layer had
been lifted off and linenbacked much in the way a window card is restored. It
would seem that this scenario has now come to pass.
My question is, who do we turn to now to authenticate these posters? I
know, for me, not that I can afford it, but I wouldn't buy a linenbacked poster
of any valuable title right now unless I knew it had been hanging in a friend's
house for a long time!
Sue
www.hollywoodposterframes.com
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:39:55 -0400
From: [email protected]
Subject: [MOPO] Let the clueless fox check the fence on the chicken coup?
To: [email protected]
Diane,
It is obvious that the cardboard was applied by the fraudsters, then removed to
leave a residue of glue and paper, in order to disguise the fact that it was
too thick and too new when it was handed over for backing and "restoration."
They figured this would not only disguise the fact that it was a new S2art.com
reproduction, but were smart enough to understand the restoration techniques
used and knew that there would have to be chemical treatment and sanding done
to the back to remove the cardboard and residue and create a smooth surface for
the masa paper, thus further disguising the true nature of the paper.
And most definitely yes, it is clearly a conflict of interest for John Davis to
do this new examination. Naturally he should be there, but he should definitely
not be in charge or the person to make the "final determination".
-- JR
Diane Jeffrey wrote:
Zeev
When we received the poster, the majority of the thick cardboard had already
been stripped away, leaving a thin layer on the back. Before cleaning and
linenbacking to occur, it is crucial that any tape, paper, glue, duck tape,
cardboard, etc be removed. The type of adhesive used will determine the method
of removal. In this particular poster, I do remember using a combination of
methods, to try to remove that back layer of "something." In my effort to help
John yesterday, I told him that when he does go to un-mount the poster, he may
find evidence that the back had been sanded. Now, unless he was able to gather
his group of "witnesses" un-mount the poster, which done properly takes some
time, let it dry, and proceed to do his lengthy analysis, in a few short hours,
I believe, his statement of the poster being "sanded" came directly from me,
and not his "expert" analysis.
You are right, John Davis is not the owner of the poster. I would not know who
the owner is right now, as my client Tom Rega consigned it to Profiles, and I
am not up on what the legal relationship between auction house and consigner
is, at this point.
In their effort to get to the truth about the poster, I feel that Profiles made
a mistake, in giving the poster back to John, which to me indicates a huge
"conflict of interest" If the intend was to un-mount the poster, a third party
should be used. I am surprised that such a large company would do that, and
hope that it does not jeopardize any legal investigation going forward.
Diane
----- Original Message -----
From: lobby card invasion
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Dracula - Update
Hello Diane
Could you please clarify for me a couple of points:
1. It is my understanding that the poster in question was sanded down to thin
paper, as the S2 Art prints are done on thick carboard. It is also my
understanding that you did the linenbacking of this print. My question is:
When you got the print for linenbacking, was it already AFTER someone else has
sanded it down previously, unbeknownst to you?
2. It is also my understanding that John Davis is not the owner of this piece.
Is it not strange that he would take it upon himself to de-linenback a poster
that does not belong to him?
Zeev
----- Original Message -----
From: Diane Jeffrey
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 11:42 PM
Subject: [MOPO] Dracula - Update
Rick
I did linenback the poster and repair the paper. We did add some text, but we
did NOT add "Morgan Litho Co" that was added by someone ELSE, and have pictures
to prove it.
I don't blame you for being confused, with this latest development, I am
confused and shell shocked.
Diane
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.
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.
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.
