Explain your preference: Used vs. Unused posters. GO!

[MoviePosterBid.com]

Most modern movie posters that are used probably don't have pinholes, right?  I assume nowadays they are all slid right in out of theater frames.  Modern to me being 1990-present.

okay, then allow me to change that too "why would I want any modern poster with any defects if I can afford to buy said poster in better than "not mint" condition

 
 

[archstanton]

okay, then allow me to change that too "why would I want any modern poster with any defects if I can afford to buy said poster in better than "not mint" condition

 
 

and all was right with the world...

[Ari]

yeah but some people don't even want a finger print on a modern poster.
Let alone whatever edge damage sliding it into the contraption does, handling it, etc.
So they collect posters that are back-doored somehow (or whatever)

Thats all well and good, and each his / her own.

But please don't let posters go the way of comics or coins etc.

Comics are meant to be read, and posters meant to be used.

IMHO of course

[archstanton]

I don't collect modern posters much at all as there are so many printed that they don't even feel special, and that is beside the fact the most of them have fairly boring artwork (if you can call it that), imo.  It doesn't help that I haven't fallen in love with too many movies from the past couple decades to warrant buying its original poster.

How cool would it be if they started having artists (painters, illustrators, etc.) do movie posters again!

[jayn_j]

newer titles? why would I want one with pinholes if I can get one without?

How long has it been since you saw a theater pin a poster?  Doesn't work with lightboxes.

[Ari]

Rich only just realised we have talkies now.

 

[paul waines]

Talkies....Ha, yea right....what next Colour?

[MoviePosterBid.com]

I saw an ad for a color film oncet. I think it was Wizard of Oz, back in 1923 you whipper snapper

[Ari]

Colour? that's crazy fool talk.
We'll see a Blackman in Washington before we see any darn' colour in them picture shows.

[Tob]

You do still see pin holes in modern posters, more so in countries outside the US perhaps (I have some modern posters from Japan with pinholes for example).

I think edgewear/pinholes/light damage doesn't bother me much because if it's a common poster, it's not worth losing sleep over and if it's a rare poster, I'm just happy to have it regardless of condition! Having said that, I look after the poster in my collection carefully (sleeves and stored flat).

[Simes]

Not sure if this has been covered already, but for my part, a modern poster only looks good if mint.

And an old and historical poster is sort of expected to Come with some historical artifacts.

It is sort of comparable to a modern chair and an antique leather chair.  One would buy and try to keep mint, a modern chair.  But an antique leather chair with wear and tear, cracked and worn leather, and history is part of its appeal.

Quite what the line is then between old and new, chairs and posters, I couldn't possibly say.

[erik1925]

In regards to Used vs Unused posters I'd like to hear what everyone prefers.  By "used" I mean displayed as intended in a theater or elsewhere to promote the movie; "unused" being printed off then stored away in a NSS factory or something for years but never displayed at the time of the movie's release.

As for myself: I am torn.  Of course a mint, unused poster sure looks nice and is often harder to find.  Yet, I can't help but get a little teary-eyed (though that may be from the pet dander) when I look at a poster that I know was hung up in the theater at the time a favorite movie of mine was in theaters.  In a way, an unused poster doesn't feel a whole lot different than a reproduction poster: it just got printed off, then sold to someone eventually to put on display in their house.  It never got to fulfill its purpose.

In my "movie room" I have a The Good, the Bad and the Ugly 1/2sh that has been used next to a linen backed, pristine Once Upon a Time in the West 1sh.  While the OUATITW looks fantastic and I love it, I get a warm feeling of nostalgia and a sense of the passage of time when I gaze at the GTBATU 1/2sh, with its staple holes around the border, little dings and etc.  I know that back in 1968 folks walked into some theater, saw that poster up on the wall, then walked into see the crazy movie that Sergio Leone had made. 

That itself makes me want to say I prefer a used poster, because I feel that history has been bestowed upon it.  It's even cooler when I know the specific theater a poster was displayed at.  The caveat for me is that a beat up, super ugly used poster is nothing I'd want to display, but if it is still very displayable then I think I'd prefer it over an unused one. 

It's a tough choice for me.  What do ya'll think?

Im with you all the way on this, archstanton. Knowing that a poster was displayed in a theater lobby somewhere, ones that might have some grease pencil notation on the back (not writing that bleeds thru, of course) and other indications that it has lived the life it was meant to live and not just folded up in some box in a warehouse, also makes me think of that same nostalgia.

I prefer and collect older material for the most part, so folds are basically the norm on US OS. And those dont bother me.

I guess the best of both worlds is finding a poster that has been used and displayed in a theater, bears a few "life" scars, but is basically in fantastic condition, especially if it's 50+ years old. Those that fit both bills always makes me happy to find.