Authenticity of late 60's posters

[Chris]

Is there a general rule for checking the authenticity of a print?
More specifically 1966 Winterland prints....

I do own the "The Art Of Rock" present to punk.

Thanks


Chris


PS.....I am aware of Eric Kings site

P E A C E


Chris

[wandering-gypsy]

Is there a general rule for checking the authenticity of a print?
More specifically 1966 Winterland prints....

I do own the "The Art Of Rock" present to punk.

Thanks


Chris


PS.....I am aware of Eric Kings site

P E A C E


Chris

Do you have Eric's guide?
Eric also will authenticate a piece for a price. He lives in Berkeley.

Jay Kastor (owner of Pychedelic Solutuion - now closed) in NYC could authenticate a piece as well but since he sold much of his stock to WV, I'm not sure he does this anymore. You can always ask.

While there are some notable forgeries (the woodstock print, for instance) the biggest problem I've experienced over 25 years is telling the printings and variants apart.
Eric's guide helps. Jay's PS catalog helps. But the two don't always agree. To add to the mix, Phil Cushway at artrock doesn't always agree with with the former two gents. He has validity since he has many of the old Tea Lautrec printers logs - a precious resource that must be published (and is not). Tea Lautrec printed many posters in the day ... so knowing the print runs on posters would clear up a lot of errors and fuzzy areas.

Too many sources but they all have useful info.

[hitmewithposters]

You need to be very carefull, especially when big dollars are involved. The work of these folks documenting these pieces and trying to figure out print runs based on differening stock, inks, colors..etc..is all well and good, but I still wonder at times.

For instance I was just selling a FD-101-1 (Rick Griffins Eternal Reservoir), for intents and purposes it seemed to be the OP-1, always believed it was..etc...and upon trying to sell a big player in the aftermarket sales business snatched it up with a buy it now, THEN asked me to verify it was the first printing, said he had his doubts and said he'd only send me the money if I verify it with Eric King (after he BOUGHT IT HE REFUSED TO PAY UNTIL I VERIFIED...how about ask questions first rather than me being forced to pay the final valuation fee to ebay then you back out, that move there alone means I will enver buy from this person). Turns out the difference between the OP-1 and the reprint is a woven appearance to the stock on the back (OP-1) and on the front (RP), while another original printing OP-5 has no such woven appearance (sounds like 1 stock change for sure on "original" prints if they call OP-1 and OP-5 the same with different stocks and sizes), but why not the possibillity of another stock change, or flipping of the stock from OP-1 to the "RP" (hence woven pattern on back versus front)....the difference of the woven stocks can apparently be seen under blacklight...but the scholars do not state WHAT the differences are and how that "poves" they are right.

So, the guy then adjusts his offer from his buy it now of $200 to $75 since he now claims its the reprint (yet still wants it ).

So my worry is that some are using this scholarly information that is partly based on hunchs and trying to figure out what a bunch of broke ass hippies did with printings in the late 60's (specifically talking about FD series)...where I'm sure there was perfect QA/QC of the stock, inks..etc...(yes thats sarcasm)...and they use this info to try and tell people they have worthless prints, but of course they still want them at significantly lower prices.

So my point is, even the experts disagree and some of their assessments seem vague, almost arbitrary and make statements of fact about printings without actual records in many/most cases. Measurements are also used as a guide, however the piece you have in your hands may not be exact to any of the experts assessments, so using measurements is not accurate (they even state this, yet they use it as a guide)...again, my FD-101 measurements fit closer to the OP-5 than to either the OP-1 or RP...so whos to say...oh yeah, the experts that want to buy your print at a discount.

So beware buying and also beware selling!

Jeremy

[Bread8]

isn't there this big notice on ebay saying your bid is a binding contract right before you click "submit"

you were probably much nicer to that buyer than I would have been.

[moemoe6434]

i also think major ebay art players are artificially inflating the prices as well, probably after they buy it from someone else at extremely low prices like your example:

http://www.expressobeans.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4559

[hitmewithposters]

isn't there this big notice on ebay saying your bid is a binding contract right before you click "submit"

you were probably much nicer to that buyer than I would have been.

yeah, I know and the seller certainly does as well, hes one of the big players in the FD/BG poster realm, so I figured I'd play nice becuase after all I did call it a first printing, but he refuted it with what I consider to be at least partially questionable information....but I did let him know that I was peeved by him hitting the buy it now on a very fair price (price was at about what the RPs have sold for on the high end and VERY reasonable if it was the OP-1)...I told him he should have asked authentication Q's first instead of giving me stipulations about how I can get him to pay (authenticate through his friend eric king) when he hit the buy it now button.

what can you do? I am certainly NOT selling him this piece at 37% of his bid becuase he claims its a reprint based on what I call questionable scholarly information...bottom line is this is a tough print to figure out the history of, as are many others....I love the print and I am certianly NOT giving it up for pennies on the dollar to a poster middle man that will simply resell it for a profit. And what kills me is eirc king is looking for a copy of the OP-5 which my dimensions almost exactly fit and he said..ah don't rely on linear dimensions....then why does eric king spend so much time using measurements to the 64th of an inch to describe the print differences???

[whalaw]

There is no doubt that many of the older posters are difficult to distinguish. As mentioned above, having King's Guide and Kastor's catalogs help. Sometimes, I will e-mail the artist for clarification. One of my rules is, if it looks too pristine, then I have doubt. Which is why I don't mind a staple hole or two in my older posters. Besides character, I believe it lends to the authenticity of the poster.

I, too, have wondered about the desparity in the auctions. I am not so sure whether it is friends bidding the item up or whether it is someone who is willing to pay more from a "trusted" Seller.

One thing that really concerns me is these private auctions. The prices paid for some of the items is double and triple what you can get if for on E-Bay. Why? Maybe the "trusted" Seller theory?

[hitmewithposters]

or perhaps a seller hiding the identity of their shill bidding partners. Some folks get top dollar almost each time they sell something, then you list the same thing and get half as much with 100% positive feedback, same description, same photos..etc...sometimes I just don't get it.

[mfs67]

The buyer was most likely concerned that someone else might use BIN before he received a reply to his email. If he had simply paid for the item and later received what he felt was a reprint, he may have ended up having to return it. He would have honored his bid, but in doing so would have added wasted shipping costs to the transaction. However, if the buyer and seller both agree to cancel the transaction, the seller can recover his final valuation fee, and the buyer won't receive a NPB strike. I believe that the listing fee is non-refundable. It's a tough situation with posters that are being offered for a good BIN price, and in which it's hard to distinguish between the first and second printing.

[Bread8]

The buyer was most likely concerned that someone else might use BIN before he received a reply to his email.

that's absolutely what it was, but too bad. Honor your f'n bid.

About a year ago i saw an auction for a s/n kozik nirvana with a BIN of $100. I KNEW something had to be wrong with it, so i sent an email asking if there were tears, pinholes, etc. I got a seller response in under ten minutes saying there were no problems, so i went to snatch it up just to see somebody (on this site ) beat me to it. Win some, lose some.

[whalaw]

The buyer was most likely concerned that someone else might use BIN before he received a reply to his email.

that's absolutely what it was, but too bad. Honor your f'n bid.

About a year ago i saw an auction for a s/n kozik nirvana with a BIN of $100. I KNEW something had to be wrong with it, so i sent an email asking if there were tears, pinholes, etc. I got a seller response in under ten minutes saying there were no problems, so i went to snatch it up just to see somebody (on this site ) beat me to it. Win some, lose some.

I agree, the bid should be honored. I, too, have lost out on a few BIN becuase I had a question for the Seller that was not answered before someone else snatched the poster with the BIN.

I wonder how the "big player in the BD/FD realm" would feel if the shoe was on the other foot? Meaning, if someone purchased a poster from him/her and then demanded authentication after-the-fact. I don't think this is the way the bidding process is supposed to work.

[Flimby]

I don't think this is the way the bidding process is supposed to work.

using the "immediate payment required" option when selling with a BIN is a good idea, imo