Hmmm... Sam, Rich, and Rick on one side, with about 100 years of experience together....
Hmmmm.... On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Richard Halegua Comic Art < sa...@comic-art.com> wrote: > I am in total agreement with Sam in this perspective > > for instance, I have some autographs that cost me beaucoup dollars that > became suspect after my purchase (or trades) with someone who turned out to > be not what he said he was. > > I showed them to a pro who said he thinks some are authentic and others are > not (The more expensive ones are apparent forgeries, so it's easy to see > what the scam was). They sit in a folder in my vault - all o fthem - and I > have no intention of selling them. I may even destroy them so they cannot be > sold by my estate someday. We're talking about maybe $15,000 in value. The > fellow who looked at them for me was shocked when I told him I wouldn't be > selling them. He explained that normally when he "de-authenticates" (in his > unpaid opinion) the owners almost always continue to try to recoup their > monies from unknowing buyers. I have no such intentions. However, before I > destroy them, I plan on sending them to noted authenticators for their > opinions (paid opinions I'm sure). If ultimately they are garbage, they will > be treated as such. > > Dave is my friend, but sometimes David, I don't get you. If the Vertigo > poster is faded, why argue about it?? Same goes for apparently suspect > bootlegs. If you even have to question the facts, then the poster is hinky. > If later it proves to be authentic - you have shown your quality by refusing > to sell the product, and now your reputation would be solidified by your > refusal to profit until there is proof positive of authenticity. > > There have been bootlegs in posters for decades. The first bootlegs I ever > saw were Hard Day's Night lobby card sets almost 30 years ago. Those were > the ones where the pinholes were reproduced. They may have been printed for > sale as repros, but some people sold them as originals be it by intent or > lack of knowledge. Woodtsock posters were also bootlegged back then and > seeing as I used to sell R&R posters at R&R conventions, I never touched > those either (I did sell over 3000 original Fillmore and Family Dog posters > over those years). I don't find it unlikely these posters were produced > after the fact, and may have sat in storage for 30 years in someone's attic, > basement, garage or where ever. But regardless of that, the facts that we do > have - very very many available, from one source etc - I would not trust > them and ultimately, the money that I could make isn't worth the hushed > whispers that I might be selling a bootleg. > > If I get offered any of these, they're going on the same shelf as the Star > Wars bootlegs. If the day comes they are found authentic.. sell them I > will.. Chances are that day will never come > > Rich > > > > At 11:26 AM 11/30/2009, Posteritati wrote: > > I recently returned one of these to a very reputable Ebay seller and my two > cents in this debate is that I would never consider selling something that I > was not sure was authentic. The questions surrounding it are enough to walk > away (even if the seller did not take it back). > > I think every honest and reputable dealer has that obligation. I have a > tube with other suspect items (including two minty white ENFORCER inserts) > that I am not interested in selling. At the end of the day, we only have our > reputation and one (or a few) posters are not worth that risk. > > Regards, > sam sarowitz > > Posteritati > 239 Centre Street > New York, NY 10013 > 212-226-2207/ Fax: 212-226-2102 > http://www.posteritati.com/ > > > > > On Nov 30, 2009, at 7:14 AM, Bruce Hershenson wrote: > > Aside from whether these are real or fake, there is also the issue of just > how many this guy has. He has sold them all over the place, but seems to > keep coming up with more. If he had 20 or 30 of them he would have sold them > all to one person and been done with it. He may well have hundreds of these, > even if they ARE authentic. > > So this is one poster where you surely can't say, "Years can go by without > one of these coming up for sale"! > > Also, the vast majority of posters where I say, "We have never seen this > particular style one sheet before!" is a poster that is consistent with > those of that year. But this one is not, as it is rolled. You write "rolled > yes....a red flag certainly.....but not unheard of especially if it was a > giveaway". > > So if it is a "giveaway", then it certainly is not "theater-used" as well. > > If you want truth in advertising, say it is likely a giveaway from an > unknown date. Then if you sell it, the buyer has nothing to complain about. > Especially because he is sure to see it over and over and over again in the > next few months and years. > > This reminds me of the "pink" Doc Octopus Spider Man posters a guy was > selling on eBay. He ASSURED everyone he had received them at the ComiCon, > and that they had given away pink and red ones, and that anyone who > preferred a red one could trade the pink one in to him, which bought him > more time to sell more of them. Trouble was he disappeared soon after he > sold his supply of pink bootlegs, never to be heard from again. > > Offer this Woodstock poster for sale if you want, but it is never going to > sell for much, given its murky origins, and its huge supply. > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 1:03 AM, David Lieberman <dli...@aol.com> wrote: > > This "everything is fake lately" hysteria is just ridiculous. The > conspiracy theorists are alive and well!! > > (not aimed at you Freeman or Kirby!!) > > reasons we believe they are authentic.....given the evidence presented so > far. > > 1. full size 27x41 > 2. right kind of paper consistent with the era....thin stock, glossy/semi > gloss front with matte back. > 3. LPIU printer union logo. > 4. L hash marks on the corners. > 5. Some of them have light foxing.....signs of age (so we've been told by a > mopo dealer who has a few).....so they are definitely old unless someone > faked foxing on a few of them. > 6. Print quality is far from perfect.....which suggests > authenticity........not repro. If someone were creating a bootleg/fake for > resale they would undoubtedly fix the minor printing defects this has. > 7. expert opinions from 3 other dealers who have actually handled them > (admittedly, they like to stay out of the fray and remain anonymous). > 8. I've been told that the source these came from had just a few other > titles from that same time period (unconfirmed). > 9. If anyone was trying to create a poster to commemorate and capitalize on > the 40th anniversary.....it certainly wouldn't be a poster like > this.......one that has (see points 1 through 6 above) > > rolled yes....a red flag certainly.....but not unheard of especially if it > was a giveaway. > > Freeman says there really were no giveaways back then..........well, this I > can't really explain...I also can't explain why this particular one sheet > (see below how it differs) never seems to have surfaced before until > recently. But if you think about it.....how many times have we read in one > of Bruce's auctions "We have never seen this particular style one sheet > before!" or something to that effect. He doesn't say it often.......but he > has said it before. > > And could it be a commercial poster from spencers, suncoast, etc? Well > anything is possible but again it just doesn't seem/feel like a commercial > poster. > > again, here is a closeup of the one we have: > http://www.cinemasterpieces.com/aapics09/woodoct09.jpg > > > many coming to light all from the same source.....a bit of a red flag > yes....but totally plausible they were tucked away all these years. > > it is highly unlikely someone just all of a sudden decided to bootleg this > poster....one that is far from being in "high demand". > > > look at the bottom of this poster.......it has completely different and > more info. than pictures of other woodstock style c one sheets. The two that > heritage has sold are different.....one of them is completely blank at the > bottom (a rolled wilding poster), and the other is folded...theater issued > but with no nss info..... And there are NO credits....blank on the bottom > except for the copyright line, the printer union logo, and where it says C > style. > > This one we are selling has full credits. It even gives credit to magnum > photos inc. and to the photographers on the bottom right. What does that > mean? Is that significant? is this a clue? > > So where did the supposed bootlegger copy this poster from?? Did he just > create the credits?? > > We only have one by the way......and it is on consignment. I don't expect > it to sell....but we have been pleasantly surprised before with this title > so we agreed to give it a shot. > > And rick please get your facts straight....we have NEVER had a rolled cool > hand luke one sheet. Never claimed to have one. We did have 1000's of rolled > posters from 68-72...but sadly cool hand luke wasn't one of them....and we > still have hundreds of obscure titles from this find that are rolled near > mint that no one would ever want (well, no one except Rich H as we sent him > several a few years ago)...... We have sold several of these rolled one > sheets to dozens of mopo members......and not one of them has ever suggested > they weren't authentic. Only you. Someone who hasn't even seen one in > person.........someone who can't even tell a fake rolled Friday the 13th > from a real one. > > so much petty jealousy in this hobby!! > > > again.....I am more than open to pulling it at the drop of a hat. I just > think that it looks and feels real so I'm going with my instinct. > > If anyone else has anything to add.....just let me know! > > > ---------------------------------------- > > > > > Hey, Dave, > > I'm not alone. Guys like Bruce were there, too. I think you're > single-handedly attempting to create your own "movie poster reality" in > insisting that these obvious reproductions are authentic. It's far more > plausible that they're repros than they suddenly appeared out of nowhere > after 40 years. It would be different if we were only dealing with the > Woodstock one sheets----but we're not. It seems like over the past two or > three years you've had more explanations for the appearance of rolled one > sheets from the 60's---first Cool Hand Luke, then a dozen other titles. If > you proclaim their authentic long enough, people will believe what you're > saying is true---with one lame explanation after another for their > appearance out of nowhere. I can't believe being the respected dealer that > you are---the pride of eBay---that you wouldn't wait until you were > ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN of a poster's authenticity--to offer it to your trusting > clientele. Sure, you say you'll refund every buyer's money if the posters > are ultimately found to be reproductions. But tell me, Dave, who's keeping > track? You're certainly keeping track of all the money your stuffing into > your pockets in the meantime, aren't you....... > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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> > > > 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. > > 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.
