EB Forum

Bakedbeens wrote: Also, I'd like to ask you guys, as artists, how do you feel about us collectors that take down posters. I usually try to wait until the day after the show, but sometimes I can't resist. I do make a point of only taking one or two and making sure there are others in the area that are still posted.

Still, I see a lot that slip thru my fingers, posted in windows, etc. Gotta get them duckets rollin again I guess.

In the short period of time I've been recruiting artists to do gig posters the consenus I've formed is that it's a huge compliment when the art is stolen.

It's up to the promotor to make sure the posters get put up and if they're good they go back to places they've stuck one to see if it's still there. I know when Dan McCarthy did the Lake Trout print for me I had to rehang prints four times at the local Kroger. Dan was flattered.

If people are taking them it means the art is good. Ergo it will probably entice people to the show.

Don't feel guilty. If it helps to soften your remorse rehang it inside a store (one where your tight with the help) with the understanding that you'll be back for it once the show is through.

it bugs me that most posters never even make it out on the street

when is the last time you've seen a poster from one of the 'big' poster artists stapled against some wood fence or taped to telephone pole?

As for the premiums for mint posters; my view is that the whole poster collecting is an upswing (aomr, flatstocks etc) and even though the cyclic nature of posters collecting will bring it down again at some point, more and more people are getting into 'scene'. This new and increased attraction brings some issues with it though

There is an insane lack of knowledge about poster art with a lot of people which is understandable but it does create some weird situations. One issue the idea that mint posters are much more valuable then non-mint posters. Or actually to rephrase it, non-mint posters should be discounted significantly to a mint poster which has become the standard these days. There is a fine difference in the previous sentences and I am not sure if people understand what that difference is nor do I know how to explain it in an internet forum (or have the braincells for it)

I am sticking by my point that these are not stamps.

My feeling is that the mongloid anal hordes in poster land are actually destructive to the poster scene and it would take me an evening and a case of beer to really explain why.

Yes, there should be a premium for a mint poster when compared to a poster with dings and creases and what not. But the current situation is retarded and I for one am glad I have the creative ability of a jar of mayo because if I were an artist I would HATE to have to deal with people freaking out about inkspots on the back of a poster or whatever bull they complain about.

Posters as an art form are amazing and I especially like the gig posters because it has infiltrated American society to become one of the only real and (street-)validated POP art forms. One day somebody else will write a more structured opinion/dissertation on to why gigposters are POP art and what the influence of this art form is on our society.

The more people treat gigposters as stamps the more it will become just that; collecting stamps. It would be a tremendous loss of potential for gigposters to be treated as such. Shoot, potential is not the right word but I dont know how else to word it.

You are looking at an ART form that continues to amaze me. I am delighted to be immersed into this by being a collector, an aficianado, and hell, being friends or friendly with some of the most amazing artists within this scene. The day gig posters end up being treated by the collector and ESPECIALLY by the ARTIST as stamps I will shed a tear for the stupidity of the scene to let that happen and to be responsible for not realizing the potential of 'their' art.

A somewhat related but different rant; take for example the best rock poster of the 1990's in my humble opinion... Kozik's NIN from 1994. I would LOVE to have a copy of that poster in my collection that came from the actual venue or from a Seattle street where it was posted. However the consensus these days is that a copy that was posted in Emo's or whatever club you have, and that smells of smoke and :gasp: has staple holes in it should be significantly discounted to a copy of that very same NIN poster but has been stored for a decade in Phil's vault or under Kozik's bed OR was sold though some shop to a collector who kept it in mylar.

Dont get me wrong.. I love the fact that some poster artists take the poster art form very serious and treat their work as art and not just a 'mere' gigposter that should be staple gunned to a wall and left out in the rain. The issue though is that turning the scene into a club of anal stamp collectors is not going to make gig posters be accepted by the retarded fine arts world or even general society as a valid form of POP art which I think it would be capable of

'mongloid anal hordes' ....

I crack myself up sometimes... sorry

Really excellent commentary Piemel.. "mongoloid anal whores'---don't know if I could come up with a phrase as good as that......
This 'thread?'[?--I don't know this argot well........] has been quite interesting. commentary to make, at least me and anyone else with 7 or less neurons.
I agree that the posters should be posted----at least that helps give a certain......verisimilitude........... We always made sure that the posters were at least received by the venues before the show-----and boy, do I have the overnight bills to show it!
note for later-----------the effect of approvals on the 60's to the 00's


This goes to a discussion I had wanted to have [along with other issues] before I got too wrapped up [or more realistic about what it would take to do a book] to at least begin some kind of dialogue on this issue----------what should be the moral and ethical and 'common sense' 'rules' of this art form? {And, as I have mentioned before, I like Kostabe, Pop Culture, unsigned urinals...............]
Maybe in short:
They must not be printed with an ink-jet printer . It's too easy with modern computing software to make 'pretty pictures' . Part of being an artist to to have the skills needed to make the vision in your brain become reality. And this is not to say that 'oh, remember the good old days' and that other crap that people my age spout with regularity......it's about knowing your craft. Things change, there is progress, but their should still be skills.
Because of the pecualiar home-spun, folk-art aspect to this art, they were, orignally, advertising that only later came to be art----. Perhaps a good parellel is blotter acid. There is so much 'vanity' blotter, not real, but vanity blotter made solely for commerce and none ever meant to be real.
Now, to the other side----selling them is necessary in order to finance the run and support the artist. {increasing/appreciation are also necessary], but I have covered that before].
The danger s: in order to have appreciation of value, there must be control of supply. When I sent out literally thousands of promoters prints, some kept them and re-sold them. This is not cool. Not to be judgemental, but the posters were sent to them [frequently, if not usually] FREE--------not for them to sell. They are important to post because that is what the art form demands.
Do I mind that an individual takes them off the poles or whatever? That the poster they got for free is now worth some money? No; it's all part of the process [does that word really work here---not].
On posted posters-------I remember once framing things for a touring show. In at least two instances we chose posted, raggy, non-'anally satisfying to the Mongol Hordes ' as Piemel so ' eloquently put it, and they were better---they looked better. And this is not some parent telling a teeneager that 'personality counts more' when no Prom invite comes----it's the truth.

Not relevant, but::::: the best 'natural' at this business I've ever met was probably Rich Meyer---the 49er QB. The best---. I thought initially, oh no, a 'bucket -head'
but his favorite [without any education, was Griffin----even had a kid named Jim after...drum roll................. . Extremely intelligent, it was fascinating hearing him talk about football, and the role of a quarterback on our rather sorry-ass looking couch.

When reading about writing/alphabets, last night I was re-reading part of Jared Deamond's book :Guns, Germs, and Steel [won a Pulitzed prize it did].. Really fascinating historical info on the different kinds of writing [logograms, syllabaries, and the like], with great bits: like: did you know that there has been only two certain originations of an alphabet based writing systems:: in the mid-east and in meso-America.......... If you haven't read this book, I would highly recomment it.....

no more time right now-------
but, what are other peoples opinions on what posters should be considered 'legitimate?'


another aside: Rick's Palladium was apparently done after the show------yet is it still a legitimate collectable peice? Has it held it's value?
P.

piemel wrote:it bugs me that most posters never even make it out on the street

when is the last time you've seen a poster from one of the 'big' poster artists stapled against some wood fence or taped to telephone pole?

As for the premiums for mint posters; my view is that the whole poster collecting is an upswing (aomr, flatstocks etc) and even though the cyclic nature of posters collecting will bring it down again at some point, more and more people are getting into 'scene'. This new and increased attraction brings some issues with it though

There is an insane lack of knowledge about poster art with a lot of people which is understandable but it does create some weird situations. One issue the idea that mint posters are much more valuable then non-mint posters. Or actually to rephrase it, non-mint posters should be discounted significantly to a mint poster which has become the standard these days. There is a fine difference in the previous sentences and I am not sure if people understand what that difference is nor do I know how to explain it in an internet forum (or have the braincells for it)

I am sticking by my point that these are not stamps.

My feeling is that the mongloid anal hordes in poster land are actually destructive to the poster scene and it would take me an evening and a case of beer to really explain why.

Yes, there should be a premium for a mint poster when compared to a poster with dings and creases and what not. But the current situation is retarded and I for one am glad I have the creative ability of a jar of mayo because if I were an artist I would HATE to have to deal with people freaking out about inkspots on the back of a poster or whatever bull they complain about.

Posters as an art form are amazing and I especially like the gig posters because it has infiltrated American society to become one of the only real and (street-)validated POP art forms. One day somebody else will write a more structured opinion/dissertation on to why gigposters are POP art and what the influence of this art form is on our society.

The more people treat gigposters as stamps the more it will become just that; collecting stamps. It would be a tremendous loss of potential for gigposters to be treated as such. Shoot, potential is not the right word but I dont know how else to word it.

You are looking at an ART form that continues to amaze me. I am delighted to be immersed into this by being a collector, an aficianado, and hell, being friends or friendly with some of the most amazing artists within this scene. The day gig posters end up being treated by the collector and ESPECIALLY by the ARTIST as stamps I will shed a tear for the stupidity of the scene to let that happen and to be responsible for not realizing the potential of 'their' art.

A somewhat related but different rant; take for example the best rock poster of the 1990's in my humble opinion... Kozik's NIN from 1994. I would LOVE to have a copy of that poster in my collection that came from the actual venue or from a Seattle street where it was posted. However the consensus these days is that a copy that was posted in Emo's or whatever club you have, and that smells of smoke and :gasp: has staple holes in it should be significantly discounted to a copy of that very same NIN poster but has been stored for a decade in Phil's vault or under Kozik's bed OR was sold though some shop to a collector who kept it in mylar.

Dont get me wrong.. I love the fact that some poster artists take the poster art form very serious and treat their work as art and not just a 'mere' gigposter that should be staple gunned to a wall and left out in the rain. The issue though is that turning the scene into a club of anal stamp collectors is not going to make gig posters be accepted by the retarded fine arts world or even general society as a valid form of POP art which I think it would be capable of

'mongloid anal hordes' ....

I crack myself up sometimes... sorry

haven't even read what you typed. just thought it'd be worth a read later

most of the artists i've heard talk about this have said they are fine having their artwork taken off poles or wood fences. As a general rule though, you should wait until after the show is over.

displayed posters are kinda like autographs to me (meaning they're only cool if i get them myself). If I know it got ripped, holes, smoke, etc from display and i know that personally because i'm the one that took it off the wall, then it's cool. if somebody's telling me that's how it got a tear i'm not interested.

if it's a new print (something two years old or less) i would want something mint. if i saw some vintage print from the 60s that was absolutely perfect, i'd accuse the seller of passing off bootlegs. overall, i'd say i'm very forgiving about roll bends, dings, etc etc. the only time i've had a problem with something i've received was a tube i got that physically had a hole in it when it arrived.

around houston, i've seen brutefish stuff stapled to the outside walls of fitzgeralds all the time. i've also seen a few jermaine prints (including bowie) scotch taped to record store windows a few weeks before their shows. I've also seen quite a few prints around town in austin by some of their locals.

Guest wrote :

"They must not be printed with an ink-jet printer . It's too easy with modern computing software to make 'pretty pictures' "

I am not sure if I agree with this. A machine is a tool and art can be made by using tools, be it a hammer, a chisel, a paintbrush or a G5 with Photoshop.

Same for the medium which could be canvas, paper or somebody's saggin tit.

Again.. same applies to the process, it can all be art and can all be creative... be it silkscreening, lithography, whatever.

Perhaps the idea that somebody can fling together a poster in 2 seconds by using photoshop has something to do with it but I am not inclined to bash any pretty picture that is produced with an ink-jet and photoshop

Because the flipside is the 1980's where the punks suddenly found the cheapest medium for reproduction in a company called Kinkos and slapped together some wonderful stuff that is not only raw and full of energy but is also a perfect companinion piece to that particular time in history. Btw, the same applies to the NIN Kozik poster which to me sums up that period perfectly.

That same punk who created a Black Flag flyer might have used an insanely cheap reproduction process (copier) on a simple medium (copypaper) and the process of generating the matrix/master might have been as simple as glueing a few magazine picture cutouts on a piece of paper and scribble some text and draw a skull here and there.

Couldnt be simpler

yet it belongs in a museum if it were up to me

Anonymous wrote: no more time right now-------
but, what are other peoples opinions on what posters should be considered 'legitimate?'

Yea, I'd likke to hear some other's opinions on this.

I"ve always liked the idea of pieces done as commemoratives (morst can fix my spelling if he wants - I always FUBAR that one up). Anyway, there's just too much history in music and too many artists inspired by it. Add in that I'd say about half of the gig posters made today aren't truly used as advertising -- they're sold or given at the shows themselves with the intent to be "memory holders" for attendees or as momentos for those who couldn't be there or for those who just like the band or for those who just like the art. There are too many facets for me to only consider those pieces used as ads to be "legit" any longer. This may have been the case years ago, but it's just not the case today.

First, I am the 'guest' listed above-----I don't even know how I did it-------.

This thread has given me pause to think [paws?]. This is a changing issue..... I was reading in one of my books on the history of posters about color----that what is considered 'matching' or that 'go together' has actually changed over the years.......

Actually, I would be more interested in what someone like Jeff at DrowningCreek has to say----and I feel he has the qualifications: the quality of his artwork is truly excellent, they really know their craft, and, most unusual in this day and age, are not lemmings. Jeff, what are your thoughts on this?

P.

Interesting that your bring up Drowning Creek. I got a nice piece off of a kiosk for a Dark Star Orchestra show. It was cold enough to freeze the glue on the packing tape used for posting, but not for the sticker advertising some web site that got plastered all over the kiosk, and one on the print. I'm glad I got this one because I liked it as soon as I saw it, and I didn't have the chance to go to the show. So, yeah, sometimes cool ones are posted, but it's sometimes difficult to get them in decent shape -- I find a lot of overlapping tape action, or someone else has gotten to them first. (morst and I sometimes end up trying to reserve the same ones posted in store windows).
There has been a vast improvement in the quality of posters in Madison since I've started collecting. There are a couple of artists in town that are making great strides in their work, like Firecracker Studios(Jolly Roger) and Rob Oman and SuperNate(sorry morst). Check em out, they're going to be big if they keep it up.

fwiw, i'm on the "street team" for the band moe.. periodically, promotional posters are sent out to street team members for promoting new shows/albums (though i haven't received any myself). the explicit instructions are to post them in a way that they can't be taken down in near-mint condition (explicit suggestions are even made to tape across the poster, etc..). i guess management doesn't want the posters just showing up on eBay, and hopes that they'll stay posted longer if they won't be "worth" taking down for that purpose. ironically, it makes the minty ones even more desirable...and thus makes the posters less likely to be posted at all - i've seen street team members selling at least part of their allotment on eBay

Bakedbeens wrote:Interesting that your bring up Drowning Creek. I got a nice piece off of a kiosk for a Dark Star Orchestra show. It was cold enough to freeze the glue on the packing tape used for posting, but not for the sticker advertising some web site that got plastered all over the kiosk, and one on the print. I'm glad I got this one because I liked it as soon as I saw it, and I didn't have the chance to go to the show. So, yeah, sometimes cool ones are posted, but it's sometimes difficult to get them in decent shape -- I find a lot of overlapping tape action, or someone else has gotten to them first. (morst and I sometimes end up trying to reserve the same ones posted in store windows).
There has been a vast improvement in the quality of posters in Madison since I've started collecting. There are a couple of artists in town that are making great strides in their work, like Firecracker Studios(Jolly Roger) and Rob Oman and SuperNate(sorry morst). Check em out, they're going to be big if they keep it up.

Ha! I've never actually seen one of those up close. The deal with DSO & with several other bands is that we do a screen printed commemorative merch piece for the show, and license the art to be used on advertising slicks also.

Which one is more legit? The slick that hung on a telephone pole, or the merch piece? Either? Both?

cushway wrote:First, I am the 'guest' listed above-----I don't even know how I did it-------.

This thread has given me pause to think [paws?]. This is a changing issue..... I was reading in one of my books on the history of posters about color----that what is considered 'matching' or that 'go together' has actually changed over the years.......

Actually, I would be more interested in what someone like Jeff at DrowningCreek has to say----and I feel he has the qualifications: the quality of his artwork is truly excellent, they really know their craft, and, most unusual in this day and age, are not lemmings. Jeff, what are your thoughts on this?

P.

Jeff is swamped right now, and I have some orders to package, but I'll try to post an answer tomorrow..... Is the question about color or what is legit? It's late & my feeble brain isn't all here.....

Judy

I felt that we were heading/adressing the question of "does a concert poster have to be used to advertise?" and also "which one is more 'legit' - the advertising piece or the show commemorative?" I'd be interested in hearing an answer to those from both of y'all at the Jeff n' Judy complex