Well, I can't speak for your screen and how your colors are adjusted, but
hopefully your computer is pretty accurate. However, I did look at the poster
itself quite closely. The colors on this poster were simply blazing! The reds
were not painted over as I could easily still see the "dot" pattern of the
offset lithography. In fact, I have to say it was one of the best examples of
this poster I've ever seen.
For the record, I've seen Grey go way out of his way to make sure the colors in
the catalogs are as close to the actual colors on the poster as possible. He
has a very high level of integrity and, like yourself, wants to make sure that
the potential bidders get an accurate image and representation of the poster so
they can bid with confidence.
I really wish you would attend the auctions yourself and then you could easily
respond to some of the comments posted on MoPo that allude to images being
doctored. If you could do that, I think you would see that this simply isn't
the case.
I think the bigger question here, is why the poster passed at the sale? Is it
indicative of the economy? Is it simply the case of supply and demand that
there are more of these one sheets available out there than previously thought?
Could it be that although demand (and desire) is high for this poster, that the
higher prices have already been achieved and as each buyer acquires the item,
that there is a smaller pool of bidders still out there? Is it a generational
thing- and now perhaps the younger generation entering this hobby don't have
the appreciation or desire for posters of films in the 1940's- or follow film
noir? And honestly, what else can we do to try to bring "new blood" into the
hobby? Do we need "new blood" in the hobby? Do you think the hobby is growing
or not?
I really don't know the answer to those questions but I think they're the ones
we should really be asking. As one of the hobby's most public faces, I'd love
to hear your take on some of these issues.
--- On Sun, 7/18/10, Bruce Hershenson <brucehershen...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Bruce Hershenson <brucehershen...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MOPO] The Scandal-plus cut, pressed washed, starched & dried....
To: "Ron Moore" <cinemaicon...@yahoo.com>
Cc: MoPo-L@listserv.american.edu
Date: Sunday, July 18, 2010, 9:47 AM
I trust you and believe you Ron. But why are the reds on the poster unlike the
reds on any other example of this poster I have seen? Is it possibly from a
variant printing? Or maybe I need to adjust the colors on my screen?
Bruce
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Ron Moore <cinemaicon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hey Bruce!
I was at the Heritage auction on Friday and Saturday. Dallas is so close to
Austin so it's easy for me to travel there and actually attend. If you had come
to the show, you could have actually compared the This Gun For Hire one sheet
to the photo in the catalog- which I did. The colors were'nt "punched up".
Since the poster passed at the sale, there's still time for you to go to Dallas
and check it out for yourself! I daresay you'd lose your $100 bet.
Ron
--- On Sun, 7/18/10, Bruce Hershenson <brucehershen...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Bruce Hershenson <brucehershen...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MOPO] The Scandal-plus cut, pressed washed, starched & dried....
To:
MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Date: Sunday, July 18, 2010, 8:57 AM
I had a chance to look at the This Gun for Hire image, and I will bet $100 that
either the image or the poster itself (or both!) have had mucho "punching up"!
When you say, "I know you err well on the side of unflattering in your
listings,
and I think it's a smart policy. And though you wouldn't
"punch up" pics, I assume you still have to adjust for accuracy?" know that our
goal is ALWAYS to present an image that accurately represents the item you will
receive. I have SO often received purchases where the buyer photographed it in
such a way that defects were hidden or obscured (my favorite was one where the
seller placed a drumstick on the top border, ostensibly to "hold it down", but
it also served to hide the rat chews in that area!).
Of course, there is also the issue of auction images where no matter how much
you "zoom" or "pan and scan" you still can't see the pinholes or foldlines that
somehow magically disappear (until of course you get the actual item).
I think this proves to be "penny wise and pound foolish". If you are solely
looking to sell one item, it may benefit you on that one item, but if you are
in this for the long term, then you have to wonder if such deceptive
advertising doesn't lose you the trust of many bidders, causing them to bid
less on your items (or not bid at all) due to the "fear factor".
Bruce
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Richard Evans <evan...@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
I'm not automatically assuming that example was punched up, it may well just be
the case that the reds were originally extremely strong and have remained so,
and that the online reproduction is accurate, (within it's limits).
Washing, bleaching etc may have had the effect of intensifying the colours,
dunno.
(Though if that is how This Gun for Hire appeared when it was fresh off the
press, in this instance I certainly prefer a little faded grandeur.)
Generally, and especially with something in this price range I still think
using some kind of a colour correction system like Pantone would be more
professional, (with the colour bar appearing beside poster) rather than relying
on adjusting by eye.
I know you err well on the side of unflattering in your listings, and I think
it's a smart policy.And though you wouldn't "punch up" pics, I assume you still
have to adjust for accuracy?
Even if you don't go near photoshop, presumably in some way, like adjusting
lighting so repro appears true to the eye, as in the case of the Vertigo?
On 17 Jul 2010, at 17:11, Bruce Hershenson wrote:
I actually had one of my employees suggest to me that we should "punch up" the
images of items we sell, and I told him that we NEVER do that (he is new, or he
would have already known that). Of course, there is no way to know if others
feel the same way (at least until you get your package and compare the item you
get to the image you saw).
Bruce
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Richard
Evans <evan...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I thought the This Gun for Hire went beyond strong colours and looked
unflatteringly garish.
Presumably not a result of restoration judging by the listing, but was it
really actually that vibrant, or did the colour reproduction exacerbate it
online?
On 17 Jul 2010, at 16:44, Bruce Hershenson wrote:
I personally agree with this. I didn't like the "make it look perfect" school
of restoration even BEFORE the Haggard scandal broke.
First, because the restorers were in effect hiding their restoration, making it
impossible to see exactly what was done (and a long time pro like myself could
spot some restoration that most amateurs would never see, creating a "fear of
restoration" among many collectors).
Second, because many of these items were SO restored that they looked almost
like "recreations". I LIKE the items in my collection to show at
least SOME signs of age, unless they are in truly mint unrestored condition,
because that is part of the joy of owning an original, knowing that it survived
all these years. If you want a perfect looking item, why not just get a
reproduction? But don't take your "very good" condition and have someone make
them look like new. If you MUST restore, why not simply do minimal restoration
to the areas that most need it?
Bruce
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:58 AM, glenndamato <glenndam...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Regarding the Heritage auction: I do believe the fakes scandal hurt the hobby,
plus many of the restored posters look like they were cut, bleached, washed,
starched & dried. I'll take old Igor back anyday.......
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
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 ListSend a message addressed
to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-LThe 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu
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: lists...@listserv.american.edu
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: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
