WIZARD OF OZ Aust One sheet - Spot the weird differences

John

Wizard of Oz Aust one sheet sold on Bidll

Wizard of Oz Aust one sheet on Heritage

Check the subtle differences between the two.

John

They are actually two different posters - different printers details and many subtle differences - very strange.

HumphreyBogart

One is a re-issue?

David

It appears to be all in the detail, or the lack of detail.  Look carefully, the differences are not that subtle. This is not just differences in the image but actual differences in the content within the image. 

For your comparison:

Bidll original image of an un-restored movie poster on the left, Heritage on linen (was it restored or recreated?) on the right - how many differences can you find?

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Was the person who laid this down on linen guessing the name of the printer or...?

 

Based on the little we can see it likely says Hacket Offset Print Syd Melb., on the Bidll copy - NO idea what it says on the HA copy

 

[Deleted User]

I think what David is implying is my first thought as well - the differences are explained by the restoration performed on the HA example.

If it was the only one known at the time perhaps there was no accurate reference detail and the restorer had to use a best guess method for all those incongruities?

[Deleted User]

Odd that HA did not list the restoration details (at least not in the auction record).  Maybe the actual sale listing had more details?

John

The poster was described as Very Fine+ on Line. (sic). I think that would have been the original description.

If there were two styles of one sheet they would be significantly different.

I am just curious as to whether it is the same style that Bidll auctioned but with massive restoration or whether it might be a different release.

[Deleted User]

John said:

The poster was described as Very Fine+ on Line. (sic). I think that would have been the original description.

Possibly true John.  I know from searching the HA database it seems back in 2003-2005 (when the Oz was sold) limited information was listed about the posters being auctioned vs. current practices. Just not sure if that is because the results are so old or because the original sale also included that little info...

John

From memory, Heritage has a policy not to alter auction descriptions. I'm guessing that the original description is the one that is there now but cant be absolutely sure.

David

CSM said:

- the differences are explained by the restoration performed on the HA example.

If it was the only one known at the time perhaps there was no accurate reference detail and the restorer had to use a best guess method for all those incongruities?

Problem is there seems to be very little (if any) of the HA poster that matches the original un-restored poster. I divided both the posters into 12 pieces and overlaid them, not one HA piece was a match for the un-restored original, not one.

If no part of a restored poster matches the original then what does that suggest?

HumphreyBogart

Very interesting indeed

[Deleted User]

Well one thing is certain is that you cannot trust the colours as displayed in the HA photo.

The representations of the stars at the top seem to be very close (ignoring the colour differences due to the infamous HA whitewash boosting)

Some other differences could be explained by register issues (like the red bar containing "Biggest Sensation since Snow White") causing the text to be slightly off in alignment.

I think that restoration is the main culprit.  The differences are too subtle to be an alternate release in my opinion.  However, if the printer info on the HA example was not restored (seems unlikely) that would be the best clue.

Or Bidll's copy is a fake!! 

Seriously though - if it is not these things what do you guys think is the explanation? 

HumphreyBogart

Has anyone seen a Aussie press sheet for this film? 

David

There are musical notes that don't match whether it is design or position, the witch is too low on the paper, the dress on the queen is both wrong shape and has stars that are different, the font doesn't match, the detail on the scarecrow & tin man is fine on the Bidll one and poor and nor does it match on the HA and so on. 

The printer's name doesn't match - AT ALL.

This miss-matches are NOT just on the edges, they are everywhere - miss-registration would explain the odd bit.

[Deleted User]

John

Definitely not register issues

[Deleted User]

Also David since you know the most about the Bidll copy - of what vintage were the other posters found with it?

David

All the same year +/- one year

David

I've just overlaid this poster:

http://movieposters.ha.com/itm/musical/the-wizard-of-oz-mgm-r-1948-one-sheet-27-x-41-australian-one-sheet-27x40-this-classic-mgm-fantasy-based-on-the-f/a/636-28863.s#Photo

Just compare the five stars, does that image (the five stars) look similar to the HA 'original'?

Anyone willing to bet against the current owner of the Bidll copy owning the only known original left in existence?

David

There are a lot of similarities between the HA 'original' and the 1948 re-release that are NOT on the Bidll un-restored original.

Rick

I don't have the press sheet but I have the herald. Here's a photo of both sides using my two copies.

edited: because Rick can't read instructions on how to paste an image from Photobuckert, copy the Direct link NOT the IMG link 

~X(

Rick

OK, I failed the photo sharing system...again!

John

Ricks heralds

Matt

Thanks John!

Rick

thanks John (and Matt for the offer!)

Matt

[Deleted User]

David said:

There are a lot of similarities between the HA 'original' and the 1948 re-release that are NOT on the Bidll un-restored original.

So what does this mean to you?  I looked at the images closely and still musical notes etc do not match up between the '48 release the one sold by HA.  That said - as you have noted - there are certainly some similarities such as the witch's face etc.

Is the inference here that the HA copy is a painted over, heavily altered, deceptively presented 1948 release?  The blue Anniversary box could explain why the dress was recreated so poorly, why the colours on the witch do no match (all green vs. skin coloured arm) and the misaligned red Snow White box.

Still the presence of all this incolouring and painting would surely have been caught before being sold by HA and described as such?

David

I am agreeing with the author of this topic, the HA copy is vastly different from the unrestored Bidll copy and in many instances the differences found in the HA copy can be found in the R48 copy, not just one or two. 

In addition the quality of the print, restoration or recreation of the HA copy is so poor I do not know how it can be referred to as an original - the difference in the fine detail in many of the areas between the two is so different it suggests to me one to me has been printed the other has not.

I personally believe only one original Wizard of Oz (1939) Australian One Sheet exists and that was purchased recently on Bidll.com, the other one is not.

There are a lot of questions that need answering

BTW: Not sure why you can't see the similarities between the musical notes between the R48 one and the HA one, the notes are actually different compared to the Bidll copy yet the same between the HA 'original' and the R-48 - for instance the two bars that are joining the two notes together are clearly printed on the Bidll copy but on both the HA original and the R48 it is solid. Given they are all one colour there is no possibility that it is print misalignment.

Below: 1. Bidll copy 2. HA 'original' 3. HA R48

1.  2.  3. 

[Deleted User]

Similarities I conceded David - exactness I did not - just look at the lower part of the "S" in "Songs" on these pics.  Bidll and HA are the same but different to R48 which misses the "O" in "over" entirely not to mention there does not appear to be a quotation mark

So we all agree there are differences - that gets us nowhere. 

John

CSM said:

So we all agree there are differences - that gets us nowhere. 

The Bidll one sheet was printed by Hackett Offset. They stopped printing in 1941 so it appears certain that the Bidll one sheet is original. A separate printer, Offset Printing Company was also around at that time.

If there is any way of establishing the name of the printer on the Heritage poster that would go a long way towards solving this mystery.

Matt

That would be nice but Heritage helping us solve the mystery...pfft....I don't think so.