jr No, you are wrong. I think you may have misunderstood my post. First of all.....a c7 poster is still a c7 poster even if it has been fully restored and now appears to be a c9-c10 poster. That is what I was comparing.....a c7 unrestored poster to a c7 restored poster that appears to be in c9-c10 condition Its pretty obvious....but I'll say it anyway....a c7 unrestored poster is almost always VERY difficult to sell. Many times the only way to sell a poster in that condition is to get it restored (if it is worth it.....which is really a whole other discussion). Again.....this is the reason Heritage and other auction houses get a lot of posters restored before auctioning them........because they will sell for more.
David Lieberman _CineMasterpieces.com_ (http://www.cinemasterpieces.com/) | 15721 N. Greenway Hayden Loop, Suite 105 -- Scottsdale, Az 85260 Vintage Original Movie Posters | 602 309 0500 | Office/Gallery Open By Appt. Only. _Our Facebook Page_ (http://www.facebook.com/pages/CineMasterpieces/7735495839?v=wall) In a message dated 7/18/2010 3:14:00 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [email protected] writes: David, Your example logic is faulty: An unrestored poster in C7 condition is essentially the same as the restored poster in C7 condition. If a C7 were "fully restored on linen" by a pro it would be considered at least a C9 or C10 (although some claim a poster that has been restored can never be called a C10 no matter how good it looks after the restoration). So, a C7 unrestored and a restored poster which the same appraiser says is in C7 condition are essentially in the same condition. In that case, I'm sure the unrestored poster would be preferred by the vast majority of collectors and probably command at least a bit more than the restored poster in C7 condition. -- JR David Lieberman wrote: Despite what some die hard long time collectors think....(the ones who don't mind looking at an imperfect poster).... If you compare apples to apples......for example a C7 fine poster unrestored vs a C7 fine poster expertly restored/linen backed......the majority of the time.....posters that have been restored with all their defects fixed sell for more than posters that have not had their defects fixed. Often times A LOT more. This is of course assuming that the restoration is good and doesn't look like it was done by a 2 year old. Most people who buy from us want their posters to look as good as they can. They usually want any restoration to be invisible (to the naked eye) but at the same time they want to know what was done to it. I know Heritage sends out dozens and dozens of posters for restoration prior to every auction. They do it for a reason. Restored posters generally bring in more money. David Lieberman _CineMasterpieces.com_ (http://www.cinemasterpieces.com/) | 15721 N. Greenway Hayden Loop, Suite 105 -- Scottsdale, Az 85260 Vintage Original Movie Posters | 602 309 0500 | Office/Gallery Open By Appt. Only. _Our Facebook Page_ (http://www.facebook.com/pages/CineMasterpieces/7735495839?v=wall) In a message dated 7/17/2010 12:10:59 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Agreed. Give me a window card with the original theater imprint, and the poster goes from a nice bit of imagery to an iconic piece of American history. Stuff written on the back of posters...as long as it doesn't bleed through...often adds a bit of being in the that moment in time to the piece. Greg Douglass Toochis Morin wrote: > I love posters that have the worn look. If I wanted them to look > perfectly new, I'd buy repros. > > Many of mine are framed with the fold lines, etc. I usually linenback > and restore if the poster is in dire need to restoration. > > Toochis > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Bruce Hershenson _<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) > *To:* [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) > *Sent:* Sat, July 17, 2010 9:11:34 AM > *Subject:* Re: [MOPO] The Scandal-plus cut, pressed washed, starched & > dried.... > > 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 > <[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _<mailto:[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) > 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 <[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >> _<mailto:[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) > 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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) _<http://www.filmfan.com>_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) >> >> ___________________________________________________________________ >> How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >> >> Send a message addressed >> to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >> _<mailto:[email protected]>_ (mailto:[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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) >> _<http://www.filmfan.com>_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) >> >> ___________________________________________________________________ >> >> How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >> >> Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >> _<mailto:[email protected]>_ (mailto:[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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) > _<http://www.filmfan.com>_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) > > ___________________________________________________________________ > > How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List > > Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) > > ___________________________________________________________________ > > How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List > > Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[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_ (http://www.filmfan.com/) ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_ (mailto:[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.
