Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
It has been suggested (and it appears to fit) that the name at the bottom of the HA copy is in fact *KETT OFFSET PRINT Syd Melb* which means the first part of the name is missing (HACKETT) - I doubt even a drunkard would miss-spell his company's name so badly as to leave off half of the letters of the first word. Helmut Hamm wrote on 14/03/2015 3:12 AM: As to printer's information on the bottom and the guidelines for the printer, no idea - one would assume the printer would ensure their name was correctly represented. One would assume that, but, as has been pointed out: A lot of drunkards in the printing business back then, so who knows? It’s all merely advertising art, so it’s hard to imagine that they would've discarded an entire print run because of a one-letter misprint in the printer’s signature. With a certain level of alcohol, a single t may well appear as tt… It is an interesting query no doubt, but I wouldn’t put too much weight on small differences like these. I find it quite likely that the posters were simply printed by different printers, or maybe at different plants of the same company. I mean, come on: Since the printer apparently had offices in Sydney and Melbourne, I find it likely that they also printed their orders in both cities. Anything else would’ve been silly. Helmut www.filmposter.net 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
As to printer's information on the bottom and the guidelines for the printer, no idea - one would assume the printer would ensure their name was correctly represented. One would assume that, but, as has been pointed out: A lot of drunkards in the printing business back then, so who knows? It’s all merely advertising art, so it’s hard to imagine that they would've discarded an entire print run because of a one-letter misprint in the printer’s signature. With a certain level of alcohol, a single t may well appear as tt… It is an interesting query no doubt, but I wouldn’t put too much weight on small differences like these. I find it quite likely that the posters were simply printed by different printers, or maybe at different plants of the same company. I mean, come on: Since the printer apparently had offices in Sydney and Melbourne, I find it likely that they also printed their orders in both cities. Anything else would’ve been silly. Helmut www.filmposter.net 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Am I right in thinking it was written as “Hackett” as well as “Hacket”. The Bidl one reads to me as “Hackett”? On Michael Organ’s page on printers, there are two from '39 recorded. One as Daybill, lithograph. Hacket Offset Print Syd Melb., 14 3/4 x 40. The other: Daybill. 'Hackett Offset.' 14 x 40. http://www.uow.edu.au/~morgan/posters2.htm http://www.uow.edu.au/~morgan/posters2.htm I don’t know what kind of strictly enforced guidelines there were over what exactly was written at the bottom, is it possible it was pretty slack? On 13 Mar 2015, at 00:02, David shadow@gmail.com wrote: Richard Indeed possible (that the second word could say Hackett), although the company name (which is printed on the Bidll copy) is in fact Hacket Offset Print Syd Melb, why would they print their own name differently elsewhere? But...squint those misty, alcohol infused, aged eyes real tight and look again, could that second word be Offset? Could the third word be Print? The last two words I agree are Syd Melb. Certainly the owner of the HA copy is about the only one who could shed light at this point. And the point you make is of course feasible (about printing in the two different states), I guess one would have to wonder why for such a short run, but of course it is possible. Still a lot of cross checking to go. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 10:35 AM: David, yep, and it is interesting. I was reacting to Jeff’s post. Agreed with everything, except assumption that one was drawn after the other, and based on whichever was the earlier printing. May well be the case, but perhaps a little bit of a leap at this stage. And, that would make one poster the lesser example. But, I’m not absolutely clear on the process, and whether there would have been a piece of art that would have been followed, if there was more than one printer used. Blowing up the Heritage one, doesn’t it look like the second word is possibly “Hackett”? And the last two words I’m pretty certain are “Syd Melb”. Is it not feasible with Hackett having offices in Sydney and Melbourne, that they could have printed at each? On 12 Mar 2015, at 21:11, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: I don't think anyone is suggesting a conspiracy of Dracularian proportions, more that it has been noticed by a long time dealer/collector that there is marked differences between two posters for the same title and supposedly the same release and given this is not normal (for the period) people asking the questions to find the answers - we may never have the definitive answer, but certainly I think it is better to ask openly than second guess quietly and forever wonder. What is very clear is these are two different posters. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 5:56 AM: This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com mailto:jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
To the best of my knowledge it was Hackett - the Bidll copy is tt (I am aware of ) Michael Oregon's site (it) was last updated well over a decade ago so not sure how accurate it is and a lot more definitive answers have been uncovered since then. There is a follower of this conversation (L. Bailey) who is somewhat of an expert on these matters (including dating the printer) and although he does not post I am hopeful he will share some more information privately with his usual contacts which can then be updated here. As to printer's information on the bottom and the guidelines for the printer, no idea - one would assume the printer would ensure their name was correctly represented. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 1:41 PM: Am I right in thinking it was written as “Hackett” as well as “Hacket”. The Bidl one reads to me as “Hackett”? On Michael Organ’s page on printers, there are two from '39 recorded. One as Daybill, lithograph. Hacket Offset Print Syd Melb., 14 3/4 x 40. The other: Daybill. 'Hackett Offset.' 14 x 40. http://www.uow.edu.au/~morgan/posters2.htm http://www.uow.edu.au/%7Emorgan/posters2.htm I don’t know what kind of strictly enforced guidelines there were over what exactly was written at the bottom, is it possible it was pretty slack? On 13 Mar 2015, at 00:02, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: Richard Indeed possible (that the second word could say Hackett), although the company name (which is printed on the Bidll copy) is in fact *Hacket O*ffset Print Syd Melb, why would they print their own name differently elsewhere? But...squint those misty, alcohol infused, aged eyes real tight and look again, could that second word be Offset? Could the third word be Print? The last two words I agree are Syd Melb. Certainly the owner of the HA copy is about the only one who could shed light at this point. And the point you make is of course feasible (about printing in the two different states), I guess one would have to wonder why for such a short run, but of course it is possible. Still a lot of cross checking to go. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 10:35 AM: David, yep, and it is interesting. I was reacting to Jeff’s post. Agreed with everything, except assumption that one was drawn after the other, and based on whichever was the earlier printing. May well be the case, but perhaps a little bit of a leap at this stage. And, that would make one poster the lesser example. But, I’m not absolutely clear on the process, and whether there would have been a piece of art that would have been followed, if there was more than one printer used. Blowing up the Heritage one, doesn’t it look like the second word is possibly “Hackett”? And the last two words I’m pretty certain are “Syd Melb”. Is it not feasible with Hackett having offices in Sydney and Melbourne, that they could have printed at each? On 12 Mar 2015, at 21:11, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: I don't think anyone is suggesting a conspiracy of Dracularian proportions, more that it has been noticed by a long time dealer/collector that there is marked differences between two posters for the same title and supposedly the same release and given this is not normal (for the period) people asking the questions to find the answers - we may never have the definitive answer, but certainly I think it is better to ask openly than second guess quietly and forever wonder. What is very clear is these are two different posters. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 5:56 AM: This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com mailto:jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
David, the differences are obvious, but more likely than not, there’s a simple explanation. Australia is pretty large, and the movie was a big-budget release from a major studio. Now the posters MAY have been printed at a single facility, but there’s a good chance they were produced at more than one machine and/or at different times. For all I know, the movie was an immediate success, so additional posters may have been needed pretty fast. Cheers, Helmut Am 12.03.2015 um 19:06 schrieb David shadow@gmail.com: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com http://bidll.com/ recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu mailto: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. To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
I don't think anyone is suggesting a conspiracy of Dracularian proportions, more that it has been noticed by a long time dealer/collector that there is marked differences between two posters for the same title and supposedly the same release and given this is not normal (for the period) people asking the questions to find the answers - we may never have the definitive answer, but certainly I think it is better to ask openly than second guess quietly and forever wonder. What is very clear is these are two different posters. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 5:56 AM: This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com mailto:jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com http://bidll.com recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu mailto: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. To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/ created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz- aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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. To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo- LA=1 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com http://bidll.com recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu mailto: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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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. To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Whilst Australia is a pretty big country it is sparsely populated, today we have just 23 million, back in 1940 there was only 7 million. Of course that was the heyday of movie-going, back then there was about 1600 picture theatres covering some 1200 towns/suburb (estimate based on the 1950 count), and there there was only one screen per cinema. Today there are less cinemas, around 300 but with more screens, a little over 2,000 screens today. How many posters were produced per film is the unknown - based on first hand information about printing movie posters and the above numbers we can probably safely estimate around 500-1,000 One Sheets were printed as a run by the printer (1,500-2,500 Daybills - which were more popular), so not a lot. WoZ may indeed have been popular but it did not enjoy an extended run of any note. It is possible that the poster was printed by a second printer; we do know the printer of the Bidll un-restored original was out of business by 1941, there is a different printer's name at the bottom of the other poster which no one can identify at this time. David Helmut Hamm wrote on 13/03/2015 5:15 AM: David, the differences are obvious, but more likely than not, there’s a simple explanation. Australia is pretty large, and the movie was a big-budget release from a major studio. Now the posters MAY have been printed at a single facility, but there’s a good chance they were produced at more than one machine and/or at different times. For all I know, the movie was an immediate success, so additional posters may have been needed pretty fast. Cheers, Helmut Am 12.03.2015 um 19:06 schrieb David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com http://bidll.com/ recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu mailto: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. To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-LA=1 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
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Richard Indeed possible (that the second word could say Hackett), although the company name (which is printed on the Bidll copy) is in fact *Hacket O*ffset Print Syd Melb, why would they print their own name differently elsewhere? But...squint those misty, alcohol infused, aged eyes real tight and look again, could that second word be Offset? Could the third word be Print? The last two words I agree are Syd Melb. Certainly the owner of the HA copy is about the only one who could shed light at this point. And the point you make is of course feasible (about printing in the two different states), I guess one would have to wonder why for such a short run, but of course it is possible. Still a lot of cross checking to go. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 10:35 AM: David, yep, and it is interesting. I was reacting to Jeff’s post. Agreed with everything, except assumption that one was drawn after the other, and based on whichever was the earlier printing. May well be the case, but perhaps a little bit of a leap at this stage. And, that would make one poster the lesser example. But, I’m not absolutely clear on the process, and whether there would have been a piece of art that would have been followed, if there was more than one printer used. Blowing up the Heritage one, doesn’t it look like the second word is possibly “Hackett”? And the last two words I’m pretty certain are “Syd Melb”. Is it not feasible with Hackett having offices in Sydney and Melbourne, that they could have printed at each? On 12 Mar 2015, at 21:11, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: I don't think anyone is suggesting a conspiracy of Dracularian proportions, more that it has been noticed by a long time dealer/collector that there is marked differences between two posters for the same title and supposedly the same release and given this is not normal (for the period) people asking the questions to find the answers - we may never have the definitive answer, but certainly I think it is better to ask openly than second guess quietly and forever wonder. What is very clear is these are two different posters. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 5:56 AM: This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com mailto:jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz- aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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.
Re: [MOPO] Wizard of Oz :: Real, Restored or Recreated.
David, yep, and it is interesting. I was reacting to Jeff’s post. Agreed with everything, except assumption that one was drawn after the other, and based on whichever was the earlier printing. May well be the case, but perhaps a little bit of a leap at this stage. And, that would make one poster the lesser example. But, I’m not absolutely clear on the process, and whether there would have been a piece of art that would have been followed, if there was more than one printer used. Blowing up the Heritage one, doesn’t it look like the second word is possibly “Hackett”? And the last two words I’m pretty certain are “Syd Melb”. Is it not feasible with Hackett having offices in Sydney and Melbourne, that they could have printed at each? On 12 Mar 2015, at 21:11, David shadow@gmail.com wrote: I don't think anyone is suggesting a conspiracy of Dracularian proportions, more that it has been noticed by a long time dealer/collector that there is marked differences between two posters for the same title and supposedly the same release and given this is not normal (for the period) people asking the questions to find the answers - we may never have the definitive answer, but certainly I think it is better to ask openly than second guess quietly and forever wonder. What is very clear is these are two different posters. David Richard Evans wrote on 13/03/2015 5:56 AM: This is hand drawn litho, yes? And that is drawn directly onto the plate? (Or is that auto lithography? Or is that another name for that same thing along with stone litho?) Need new plates, it's redone. Or more than one set of plates, then it's done following the guidelines as closely as possible. And if it's a big release, wouldn't it make sense to have more than one printer, rather than ship from one location? Big place Oz. Think any conspiracy theory here may be going down the Red Brick Road. Sent from my iPad On 12 Mar 2015, at 18:19, Jeff Potokar jpotok...@ca.rr.com mailto:jpotok...@ca.rr.com wrote: Those are 2 totally different posters. One based on the other, with one redrawn, based on the other's artwork. It's more than just color and slight printing differences. As quick examples-- Look at the witch's nose (its profile), or Glinda or Dorothy's faces.. or the letter 'g in the word Songs. All the same pose and look and general placement, but NOT the same drawn/created imagery. Not at all (imo). Jeff On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, David wrote: Thanks Allen All good information, although I don't think it was the evil drink in this case that would explain all these the differences! David allen day wrote on 12/03/2015 10:26 PM: Hi David, I read the discussion and checked the pics provided. If there was only one printer (and one printing company location) for all the paper involved, it is obvious that the examples were manufactured at different times. However, the subtle differences can be due to different printers / locations / printing companies, as well as the restoration process. I used to be a printer some time ago (1970s), on machines as small as an ABDick letterpress to as large as a Harris 35x45 or a Miehle 43x60. Large machines had their own platforms / walkways, and bars so the printer would not fall off the machine to prevent serious injury. All printers in those days were male and nearly all of the older printers were alcoholics. Differences in finished product (even in the same plant) could be due to (among others) different machines, printers, registration, ink, plates, paper quality, what time of day finished product was manufactured (printers were less concerned as they continued to drink all day), indoor temperature and air conditioning (yeah, humidity played a heckuva part in printing). Now ... nearly every difference has now been corrected by improved technology. ad On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:52 AM, David shadow@gmail.com mailto:shadow@gmail.com wrote: There is some strong discussion going on in a forum about all many the differences between an original Wizard Of OZ un-restored one sheet sold on bidll.com http://bidll.com/ recently and the linen backed one apparently sold some 12 years ago on HA. http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/866/wizard-of-oz-aust-one-sheet-spot-the-weird-differences Thoughts? 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: lists...@listserv.american.edu mailto:lists...@listserv.american.edu In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
