|
Michael,
I agree that if a poster has been restored or
"touched-up" that fact should be disclosed in the description, but this
seller was hardly alone in failing to do that. And, realistically, if buyers are
going to start universally rejecting bidding online on "restored" or
"touched-up" posters as you seem to be suggesting they do, then you can't
expect sellers to be rush to put a DO NOT BID sign on their auctions by
mentioning the touch-up now, can you?. As a purely practical matter, you
can't reasonably advocate that sellers disclose that there has been touch-up or
restoration and in the next breath also advocate that "nobody should
bid" on restored or touched-up posters without physically looking at them
first.
That is why, a bit like Rudi a few weeks ago, I am
now suggesting that some people are becoming a little obsessive
about all this. Restoration and touch-up are traditionally acceptable
techniques in this hobby/industry (so long as it is done well, with skill
and appropriate materials). My problem is with you making rash, general
statements about how nobody should ever buy a "restored on linen" poster without
seeing it in person is that while that might be the wisest approach for
someone who is super condition-conscious like yourself, it is not an
appropriate recommendation to make to everyone -- thousands of other people have
been buying restored or touched-up on linen without seeing the
poster first for 30 or 40 years now with great satisfaction. You just
have to make sure the seller has a no-questions-asked-no-hassle refund policy is
all.
And, if you wrote the guy and suggested he change
his description... and he did... then what was the point of bringing him up
in public at all? The seller did as you requested. No need for you to go
public about it since he was so obliging. In my opinion you and a couple of
others are performing a valuable service with some of these alerts, but in
some other cases are jumping the gun, going too far in your statements without
enough evidence and sometimes making a lot of noise over nothing -- as in the
case of the "horrible" ALL ABOUT EVE insert which may have been horrible by
your standards but was a sufficiently good deal for two of the most
savvy buyers and sellers in this business to snap it up at the BIN price once
you brought it to their attention.
So, I'm simply suggesting you exercise some
caution, restraint and good judgment in these alerts, least you overdo it in
your zeal and undermine your credibility with many readers. Or not. It is... as
they say... "just a suggestion" and only my personal opinion (which we
all know I make a heroic effort to keep ever so humble).
As for Bruce describing what a poster looked like
before restoration, I too applaud the concept but am not so enthusiastic about
his execution. Note that he never shows a picture of what the poster looked like
before restoration. But since he is selling consignments from other people,
perhaps he doesn't have a before picture to show us, right? ... but then,
how does he know what it looked like before it was restored...? I'm not singling
Bruce out here, as he does more in this regard than many sellers, including
Heritage and Bonham's. I only point this out about his descriptions because
you brought it up and seem to think what he does is definitive in this regard,
while I do not.
You seem to be on a crusade against restoration and
touch-up. Note that below you say, in all caps, "the SELLER SHOULD CONFESS" to
touch-up and restoration -- clearly indicating you consider such to be a crime
(OK, yes... I know you were making a joking reference to the poster in question
being "I CONFESS"... but still your attitude towards touch-up and restoration
does seem to be one of universal condemnation). Now, I'm no fan of
over-restoration myself, but I recognize that quality restoration is an
accepted technique in our hobby/industry and actually does enhance the value of
a damaged poster up to a point (unlike some areas of collecting where even
a tiny bit of restoration is considered verboten, such as comic
books).
-- JR
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael B
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 14:39
Subject: Re: [MOPO] SELLER'S RESPONSE TO ---- I CONFESS
POSTER JR---
BUT for me, the seller would not have added that the poster had
restoration.
Restoration MUST be disclosed. Otherwise, disappointment
ensues.
Now the description is somewhat improved. Now, the buyer has cause to
make further inquiry.
I did what was necessary. Had it been in mint condition, i might have
followed it.....perhaps, waiting for it to be relisted at a lower proce.
But, when he confirmed it was restored, i had no interest in it.
JR, it seems to me that when others alert MOPOers, you seem to say the
alerters over-react. You should cool it when criciticizing the
criticizers. (I received 4 pvt emails saying how
astute i was regarding I CONFESS.)
iroincally, i believe the SELLER SHOULD CONFESS.
michael
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 2:25 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] SELLER'S RESPONSE TO ---- I CONFESS POSTER Michael,
Jeez... you guys really have gone off on a witch hunt. Do a
little research on Salem, Massachusetts in 1692 and calm down a bit. While
this is a terrible photo to try and judge condition on, there's a very good
chance that most or all of the intensity and apparently obvious nature of
the "white spots" is due to flash reflection. Why? Take a close look
at the top right hand corner, where the video tape still in its glossy shrink
wrap is holding the corner of poster down. You can see the light reflected
off of the video tape and onto the poster and that reflection is showing up
as a definite white bar on the surface of the poster which looks like all the
other "white spots" and that bar is definitely a reflection, not something on
the surface of the poster.
Michael, you really have to reign yourself in a bit. You can't
go around judging and condemning stuff -- at least publicly -- on such
incomplete information. You can't really tell what's going on from this picture
and since the seller is long-time with a good feedback rating, you're not really
entitled to call him a liar and a cheat when he responds to you with what may be
the truth about the poster. I'm very familiar with the way bright,
artificial light like a flash can really accentuate restored areas in a picture
that are virtually invisible when viewed by the naked eye in normal lighting
conditions. First, you should have asked for a better photo -- larger and higher
resolution and WITHOUT flash reflections... ask him to take it out in the
sunlight and photograph it in natural light if he can't control his flash... and
use a viable picture to judge the condition.
Now, you are a stickler for condition and it may well be that
it would still be too much for you, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be
acceptable to another collector who wanted this title. You may be right that the
white sports are incredibly badly-done touch-up work, but from what I can see
here, I kind of doubt it. But the picture simply isn't good enough for me to say
-- or for you to say, either. "Very good-excellent" condition is NOT a rating of
any kind, it can mean whatever the person making the statement wants it to
(which is why I have been advocating for years that sellers use the C1 - C10
rating system, but no one wants to take that much responsibility). Still,
we both know that in movie poster collecting it is acceptable to rate a
poster with this kind of restoration in that condition range IF the
restoration is done well (which it doesn't look like in this photo, but you
simply can't tell from this photo).
I appreciate the alerts you send us, but don't get carried
away... you need more information before you can go public with an accusation
like this -- if the seller won't provide a better photo, then maybe you
should say something or just quietly take a pass, but don't make public
accusations without a better evidentiary foundation than you have on
this.
-- JR
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael B
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 9:41
Subject: [MOPO] SELLER'S RESPONSE TO ---- I CONFESS
POSTER link:
i questioned the seller about the white marks on the poster. His
response:
|
- Re: [MOPO] SELLER'S RESPONSE TO ---- I CONFESS POSTER JR
