Page 10 of 13

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 7:02 pm
by iratasan
ah,allright. thanks.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 7:14 pm
by dmswsp
jojobadass wrote:most of of Michael Everett's prints are digital prints.

there seems to be some concern about existing bootlegs and/or the potential ease of bootlegging his prints.

norby offered everyone to send their prints in to be s/n by Michael.

Josh, an ex-wife, showed up and had a shat.

gigposter donkeys came in and stampeded the idea of s/n after the fact as unethical.

then norby changed course and offered everyone to send their prints in to be authenticated, stamped, and signed.

gigposter donkeys continue to bash this idea because they are generally lazy and refuse to read past page 1 of any thread.


This about sums it up. :clap:

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 7:36 pm
by theomont
As a first time owner of some Everett's (the lenticulars) I'll say that it would be nice to have a signature on the back of them but don't think I want to part with my prints to get it.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 8:00 pm
by parlow
Gigposter Donkeys? Ha. They brought up a good point about the numbering, and it must have been good enough to change norbyjakes mind.
jojobadass wrote:most of of Michael Everett's prints are digital prints.

there seems to be some concern about existing bootlegs and/or the potential ease of bootlegging his prints.

norby offered everyone to send their prints in to be s/n by Michael.

Josh, an ex-wife, showed up and had a shat.

gigposter donkeys came in and stampeded the idea of s/n after the fact as unethical.

then norby changed course and offered everyone to send their prints in to be authenticated, stamped, and signed.

gigposter donkeys continue to bash this idea because they are generally lazy and refuse to read past page 1 of any thread.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Sun May 24, 2009 8:12 pm
by jojobadass
I believe it was the mods at EB who correctly handled the situation as it evolved via PM instead of bashing good folks in public during in the process. I apoligize for giving the GP fodder any credit what so ever.
parlow wrote:Gigposter Donkeys? Ha. They brought up a good point about the numbering, and it must have been good enough to change norbyjakes mind.
jojobadass wrote:most of of Michael Everett's prints are digital prints.

there seems to be some concern about existing bootlegs and/or the potential ease of bootlegging his prints.

norby offered everyone to send their prints in to be s/n by Michael.

Josh, an ex-wife, showed up and had a shat.

gigposter donkeys came in and stampeded the idea of s/n after the fact as unethical.

then norby changed course and offered everyone to send their prints in to be authenticated, stamped, and signed.

gigposter donkeys continue to bash this idea because they are generally lazy and refuse to read past page 1 of any thread.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 11:17 am
by piemel
Wait.... Some of them are digital posters?

Hahahahahaha!!!

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 12:23 pm
by jojobadass
piemel wrote:Wait.... Some of them are digital posters?

Hahahahahaha!!!

go back to GP and make $5 silkscreens that no one cares about

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 12:40 pm
by theomont
piemel wrote:Wait.... Some of them are digital posters?

Hahahahahaha!!!
Just out of curiosity, what medium do you use when the Grateful Dead commission YOU to do a poster?

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:39 pm
by slujkr
If anyone has a Red Rocks Allman Bros. Everett poster, send it to me instead. And Michael, if one of them turns up I'm definately interested, numbered or unnumbered, signed or unsigned. I have many of your prints and will not be returning any but it's a nice gesture and effort.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 6:12 pm
by Grateful69Phish
Are prints worth all this hate?

Little did I know when I bought this one one signed by Michael AND Phil how unique it was.......

Image

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 9:30 pm
by chalkdust
piemel wrote:Wait.... Some of them are digital posters?

Hahahahahaha!!!
Do you even know anything about printing? Oh, your statement answered that.

Any quality litho printed in the past 15 years is most likely a "digital print".

You should just keep your mouth shut, seriously.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 10:06 pm
by hainshead
For better or worse, I felt compelled to read this entire thread and I can't get over the tone of some of the member's posts. Why people have to be such freaking d-bags if they dontt agree with something is beyond me. If you don't agree with the idea, say so in a constructive way like some have, (mostly mods) and actually contribute to EB.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 12:06 am
by pjtaper
summary please...

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 1:02 am
by MattStrine
mreverett wrote:
The 2nd edition of SCI Art Factory was S/N maybe in a higher run (200?) but included Keller Williams as guest, visibly different in number and inclusion of new lettering.
Official and official. I do not know of any Ralston print issues, a 100% benefit but still worthy of consideration here...
Michael
Michael,
It is my understanding that you never fully signed and numbered the Art Factory edition. Can you confirm? Also, can you go into specific details on which posters of yours are believed to have been bootlegged? Perhaps you can tell us what to look for.

Re: Michael Everett Posters IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 1:28 am
by robbieXeff
this guy is an asshole for not numbering his prints. he's a bigger asshole for trying to re-number his prints years later. the people agreeing that this is a good idea are drymounting idiots.