Restoration pitfalls.
in Restoration
Firstly I will admit that I do believe personally that film posters should not be restored and to be left in their original condition, whatever this may be.. If others prefer to restore posters that's fine with me though.
There is one example that I will present here where the restorer overlooked and left off important details and even added new information on to the restored poster that wasn't on the original version.
The original unrestored 1932 U.S.A. three sheet.
The restored version.
This original poster has the artist Wynne W. Davies credit appearing on it. One of a number of Columbia Pictures poster artwork Wynne W. Davies completed during his time in Hollywood in the early 1930s.
No credit at all of the Morgan logo credit to be seen.
The advertising information appears on the bottom left hand side of the poster within a dark brown background.
The Columbia copyright details appear on the bottom right hand side of the poster, again within a dark drown background,
The restored poster is minus the Wynne W. Davis. signature.
The Morgan logo that wasn't on the original poster has been now added,
The advertising information originally printed on the bottom left of the poster now appears on the bottom right hand side of the restored poster, and minus the dark brown background.
The Columbia copyright information details that appeared on the bottom right hand side of the original poster now appear on the restored poster version in an altered version of this information, and again minis being within the dark brown background.
Sorry, but I am a sticker for information being 100% accurate. I am looking forward to any feedback regarding this poster's restoration.
There is one example that I will present here where the restorer overlooked and left off important details and even added new information on to the restored poster that wasn't on the original version.
The original unrestored 1932 U.S.A. three sheet.
The restored version.
This original poster has the artist Wynne W. Davies credit appearing on it. One of a number of Columbia Pictures poster artwork Wynne W. Davies completed during his time in Hollywood in the early 1930s.
No credit at all of the Morgan logo credit to be seen.
The advertising information appears on the bottom left hand side of the poster within a dark brown background.
The Columbia copyright details appear on the bottom right hand side of the poster, again within a dark drown background,
The restored poster is minus the Wynne W. Davis. signature.
The Morgan logo that wasn't on the original poster has been now added,
The advertising information originally printed on the bottom left of the poster now appears on the bottom right hand side of the restored poster, and minus the dark brown background.
The Columbia copyright information details that appeared on the bottom right hand side of the original poster now appear on the restored poster version in an altered version of this information, and again minis being within the dark brown background.
Sorry, but I am a sticker for information being 100% accurate. I am looking forward to any feedback regarding this poster's restoration.
0
Comments
This in my eyes just establishes that the restored poster bottom credits on the posters are just educated guesses, and are not necessarily 100% accurate.
Both the above One Man Law and Ridin' For Justice Columbia 3 sheets, also from 1932, do not have the Morgan logo printed on them.
This Forbidden Trail Columbia Pictures 1932 U.S.A. one sheet, just out of interest has a Wynne W. Davis alternative W W D / signature printed on it.
And the award for the all time worse daybill restoration must go to Rebecca ( 1940 ).The restorer or owner of the poster seemingly believing the 1947 re-release poster on the right was an original release poster, and then proceeded to convert it to being a pre 1941 long daybill in size..
But as someone who handles and displays her posters, I can say that some really need it to ensure they don't fall apart.
Alot of the long daybills are practically falling apart and without resto, there is no way they could make it up on my walls.
But the poster has to need it. Anything which is in pretty good condition to start with, I dont touch. It's not needed.
I think restoration has its place... The layers of painting is were I think too much is being done. Just conserve it, support it and be done. At the most touchup with watercolor pencils only. Anything more than that I think it loses originality - although I have many peices that have al kinds of restoration.
I like european style with water color touch-up. I am even in more favor of paperbacking vs. linenbacking... However - the mainstream collector community wants linebacked, painted posters. Not conserved and supported.
All reasonable comments that you make regarding restoration.
If restoration is done with the sole purpose of enhancing and preserving a poster's artwork without altering the original poster artwork in any way by adding anything new or even removing anything original, I am fine with that. What I object to is, as in the case of the earlier posted Hello Trouble U.S.A. one sheet and Rebecca Australian daybill posters, is the guessing aspect where unconfirmed material is added to a poster, and as a result of this having it losing it's originality.
When you dont know leave it as it is...
Here you go Ves.
For me, this is how NOT to do it. Either do it all, not at all...
I have two complaints with this technique. While the posters look better NOW, the restoration paint often ages far differently than the poster, and becomes super-noticeable over time. And that can be very expensive (and difficult) to address down the line. And just as bad, these posters are often passed off as having "minor restoration" to newer collectors.
I have had abominations that were massively repainted consigned to me, and I have looked them up at other auctions they were sold at, and the extent of the restoration was barely hinted at. Bah
Here is a handy checklist to help tell eMoviePoster.com apart from all other major auctions!
To follow up on the partially restored poster image recently included here by Ves of Happiness Ahead ( 1934,I thought that you may like to see the before and after restoration images.
The added grass image on the bottom left hand side of the restored poster ruins it for me. The dogs legs were seen firmly planted on the grass in the original U.S.A. one sheet as seen below. The legs and feet are nowhere to be seen on the restored version, thus losing its originality.
Secondly the restoration of more modern common place available posters with complete copies easily sourced elsewhere, that have only very minor damage is something unnecessary in my thinking.
I say leave it blank. What do you think?
Here is a handy checklist to help tell eMoviePoster.com apart from all other major auctions!
I will say, if it was my piece, i'd try to recreate the tiny writing at the bottom, always fun to try to make it as original as possible. I've always looked at poster restoration akin to classic cars. Trying to bring them back to life; to enjoy and hopefully pass on that piece of history to the next generation to enjoy. So, i think preservation and some restoration certainly has it's place. ....thank goodness they preserved the Berwick Discovery of paper. Great stuff to see!
Here is an example where neither the person getting the poster restored, nor the restorer knew what they were doing, nor it seems took the time to find out, which would have been relatively simple.
In this instance, I agree with Bruce...better to have left it blank if you had NFI!
For those that may be unaware of the significance regarding the printer's details the following information.
The Marquis Preferred film is from 1929. yet the printer appearing on the poster Robert Burron Pty. Ltd. Sydney only commenced printing film posters circa very late 1956 in Australia. A major mistake happened here which I do find annoying.
If the people involved in the restoration had taken the time to check out Bruce's website they would have found a more likely to be credit to apply to the poster.
This Richardson W.E.Smith credit was used on the following two Paramount Pictures 1929 Australian released film daybill posters.
Sometime between 1930 and 1931, the year where the following example comes from, the Paramount printer's credit printed on the bottom of the poster was replaced by a more detailed version.
I SO wish the people who own posters like these would leave them as they are, OR give them to REALLY talented restorers. Undoing amateur restoration can be very hard and expensive.
Here is a handy checklist to help tell eMoviePoster.com apart from all other major auctions!
my 2 cents.
A couple however, I chose to simply hang with the burnt edges on display (it creates a good conversation starter for visitors and in some way goes with the burning candle on Hell's Hole).