I would say Phil is likely one of the few people who probably has seen more
silent posters than I have, so I can only add a little to what he said.
There were a LOT of 1910s posters that measured 28 x 42 exactly, and I have
encountered a few that measure odd sizes. I have seen a lesser number from
the 1920s, but I have seen some. There was really not much of a standard on
printing sizes until the early 1930s.
Phil is dead right about six-sheets (and 3-sheets too). People think of them
as 81 x 81 and 41 x 81, but actually they measured all over the place. The
smallest were from Warner Bros in the 1930s, which in the 1930s often
measured around 41 x 75, and 75 x 81, no doubt one of their cost cutting
measures in the depression.
Better than measurements with silent posters is to look for indications of
trimming anywhere, and to measure the distance between foldlines (which
almost always should be uniform).
Of course the best of all is to find an image of another example of the
poster, but all too many of these seem to be "one of's", so that is not
possible.
Bruce
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Steven F. Poole <stand...@ll.net> wrote:
> Hi Phil-
> Thanks for your quick reply and confirming my experience with this
> particular sheet and others. Anyone else? Was this slight variance an
> issue and true of all companies across the board before NSS?
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Phillip W. Ayling <mro...@earthlink.net>
> *To:* MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2009 8:19 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [MOPO] Size Matters........
>
> Steve,
>
> Without digging out all kinds of posters, I believe I have a large number
> of posters from the 20's and 30's that are larger that what might be
> considered standard for (lacking a better term) the NSS 27" x 41" years.
> Many of mine are larger than that. Many approaching 28" by 42" A half
> sheet being actually half of that size and a lobby card actually being
> tuckable with a folded one-sheet.
>
> That being said, while I don't have smaller one sheets from that period as
> you describe, I do have some 3 sheets and 6 sheets (Bob Steele and
> Universal/Adventure Eddie Polo serials come to mind) which were printed on
> individual single sheets similar to the size that you are mentioning. Some
> of those 6 sheets are (for example) 78 or 76 inches square, where 81" x 81"
> is a more common measurement later on when they were printed as combinations
> of one sheets and two sheets.
>
> Regards,
>
> Phil Ayling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Steven F. Poole <stand...@ll.net>
> *To:* MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2009 5:53 PM
> *Subject:* [MOPO] Size Matters........
>
> Need some opinions and experiences, please. Those who know me in the hobby
> know that my collecting tastes center around posters from the 20's - 40's
> (all shapes and sizes and genres....a generalist) to be sure)..
> My question regards stone-lithos from the late 20's, specifically Morgan
> Co. Recently I traded a 1 sheet, linen-backed from a late silent 1928
> Ramon Novarro film. The backing had been done in the late 80's/early 90's
> by Igor Edelemen (sp?). The previous owner of the poster had trimmed the
> linen border up to about 1/2 inch from the paper. No paper appeared to be
> missing and, in fact, there was a nice even border of off-white all around
> (not to mention a hairline linen lip). The 1 sheet itself was a bit
> off-sized.... about......27" x 40". Again, no trimming was apparent. The
> question for collectors, dealers, restorationists, etc. Is this a single
> instance of "off sizing" or have you seen other silent material that was
> just a bit off? Since these posters were printed and distributed...by
> Morgan, Tooker, Contenental, etc. and not the NSS, it seems this could be
> so. I also have a Wallace Reid 1 sheet from 1919 by Morgan and it also is
> off-sized....just a tick longer in this case going across.
> I realize that we ae not looking at a great size difference in these
> examples, but I am curious. Thanks in advance for any insights.
>
> Steve Poole
> 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.
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2410 - Release Date: 10/02/09
> 18:24:00
>
> 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.
