Valentino original art cover- Is this the "real" thing or ....?

[Mirosae]

I find myself agreeing with Rich in that it's had (a lot of) restoration.  If you look at the upper right corner of the 'eye' comparison photos at the lines on the turban you can see the ghost images of the original lines of the folds underneath the overpainting.

GFM gallery is definitely first rate, but in this case the question for me would be do you want to shell out your hard earned dosh on something that has had so much work done on it, not the original vs. repro question.  

That said, it is lovely.

[Edit: upper RIGHT corner.  Need to remember that "right" is the hand with the ribbon tied to it...]

Thank you Peter Always good to hear from you. I too heard wonders about this Gallery.

[Mirosae]

I've bought a couple of posters from Grapefruit Moon in the past, they are great. Dan is the former lead guitarist of Soul Asylum, remember those guys? 

I've bought a poster from these guys. One of my best purchases last year. They have all kinds of good stuff for sale. Have no idea about the Valentino though...

You two trouble  makers spending all your dosh on a pin up  posh

   

I should dedicate my life to writing poems....

[Mirosae]

man can you be a dumbass sometimes

Hey..watch your cheeky tongue mister...

 

[Mirosae]

 It is also good to read plenty of food for thought - not just for me but for anyone out there considering a similar purchase.


This is why APF is so wonderful. Thank you  

I learned three things from this thread:

1- the Gallery has a good reputation and it is worth considering;

2- You bought items from them already - bunch of avid pin-up collectors (no one would have ever guessed!) 

3- Not a clear answer_ different camps : like in life never a straight simple answer ..though the nos are winning

A huge thank you to those who contributed in good spirit.

Very helpful....

[110x75]

Siempre es un gusto, tia! 

[Crazy Vick]

(Endless loop in my head since this morning...)

..Runaway train never going back... Wromg way on a one way traaaack...seems like I should be getting somewhere..

[mwright]

Really interesting thread!  I also appreciate your input about paints Rich.  I just don't see that this picture, if original, could be anything but completely restored to the point where everything was gone over again.  I also think that if it was restored they did not do a very good job.  If I were to take this information into account and also the conflicting information that was coming from the gallery I would pass on this one IMO.  I guess it would be cool to know (if purchased) the original was under the restoration but the overall feeling of the piece has a completely different vibe than the image on the magazine cover.  I also don't think the possible explanation of the missing line next to the signature holds up.  The restorer must have looked at the original magazine cover and saw there were clearly lines on both sides of the signature.  This painting kind of reminds me of how some of the S2 reproductions came out on the classic movie posters that were hand pulled.  Some are great, others miss the mark.

When I got my original art for the JAWS 2 THAI poster and compared it to the actual poster, NOTHING was out of place except for color differences due to printing.  This is obviously because the painting was not restored, but I don't see much of anything that lines up with these 2 images on the small detail level.  Again this is all IMO.

And Rich that 1940 pastel you have is just gorgeous!

[MoviePosterBid.com]

Really interesting thread!  I also appreciate your input about paints Rich.  I just don't see that this picture, if original, could be anything but completely restored to the point where everything was gone over again.  I also think that if it was restored they did not do a very good job.  If I were to take this information into account and also the conflicting information that was coming from the gallery I would pass on this one IMO.  I guess it would be cool to know (if purchased) the original was under the restoration but the overall feeling of the piece has a completely different vibe than the image on the magazine cover.  I also don't think the possible explanation of the missing line next to the signature holds up.  The restorer must have looked at the original magazine cover and saw there were clearly lines on both sides of the signature.  This painting kind of reminds me of how some of the S2 reproductions came out on the classic movie posters that were hand pulled.  Some are great, others miss the mark.

When I got my original art for the JAWS 2 THAI poster and compared it to the actual poster, NOTHING was out of place except for color differences due to printing.  This is obviously because the painting was not restored, but I don't see much of anything that lines up with these 2 images on the small detail level.  Again this is all IMO.

And Rich that 1940 pastel you have is just gorgeous!

Mike, I don't think the restorer had a copy of the magazine cover to look at, but also I've seen people do restorations on pastels and it is the most impossible restoration there is, beyond hiring someone to do the work that would cost many times what the painting is worth. The restorer was better than Chris Cloutier.
I have no doubt it is the real piece

and thanks.. I've had that Armstrong for 30 years.. I used to have another Armstrong and 2 Mozert pastels. I also had a Margaret Brundage pastel for Weird Tales once, a 1935 cover. It had come from a very famous comic art collection I got a few pieces from. There was something spooky about the WT cover. I never slept well as long as I had it in my home back then. I traded it off for the only Norman Saunders horror comic cover known to exist plus a stack of other art. My buddy later sold it to a collector in Florida who still has it.

[mwright]

I'm certainly am no artist so I appreciate all the info Rich, especially regarding the restoration of a pastel being extremely difficult 

[erik1925]

Mike, I don't think the restorer had a copy of the magazine cover to look at, but also I've seen people do restorations on pastels and it is the most impossible restoration there is, beyond hiring someone to do the work that would cost many times what the painting is worth. The restorer was better than Chris Cloutier.
I have no doubt it is the real piece

and thanks.. I've had that Armstrong for 30 years.. I used to have another Armstrong and 2 Mozert pastels. I also had a Margaret Brundage pastel for Weird Tales once, a 1935 cover. It had come from a very famous comic art collection I got a few pieces from. There was something spooky about the WT cover. I never slept well as long as I had it in my home back then. I traded it off for the only Norman Saunders horror comic cover known to exist plus a stack of other art. My buddy later sold it to a collector in Florida who still has it.

If this is the case, then it makes one wonder why he wouldnt have tried to obtain one, so that he could been more exact in the restoration. The subtlety of the original is gone in many areas. The retouch work is rough and not fluid like the original was, on areas of the headdress and the bands of color, that move downward, as well as the 2 horizontal, gold bands above Valentino's forehead.

I guess the fact that it is still in existence, even in this overly restored state, is better than not having it around at all.

[MoviePosterBid.com]

because to most people, trying to find the magazine would be at best, difficult

you can't just presume everything is easy. Try to find a copy of this specific issue this week, and let me know if you were successful.

it's also possible the people who owned it may not have even known what it was. Maybe they found it at a flea market 40 years ago

hey, here's an exercise.. go to Heritage and look up Frazetta paintings and examine each one against the original printed material.
Frazetta changed many of his paintings after publication. The cover to Vampirella #1 - he removed her clothes and she is now, naked. Kevin Eastman owns this piece

look for a copy of the Monster Mania from 1966 with the cavemen cover and match it against the painting which I believe Heritage has sold.. no longer the same. he changed the #@*&% painting! Guess what - artists do this all the time! Not that it has anything to do with the Valentino, but examining them will add to your education

I spent years selling this type of art.

[erik1925]

I get what you are saying completely. I was more just thinking aloud and saying it was too bad the artist who did the retouching didnt have the mag. cover for reference, possibly.

[50s]

Is there any evidence any part of the image is original. Quick look maybe, close look doubt it

[MoviePosterBid.com]

Is there any evidence any part of the image is original. Quick look maybe, close look doubt it

go to Dan's store and examine the piece in person. You simply don't know what you're talking about.

[Mirosae]

go to Dan's store and examine the piece in person. You simply don't know what you're talking about.

All views on good faith and spirit  are welcome. I actually appreciate  different opinions, yours and Steve's. Most of us are not experts but take a view based on our tastes or semi-informed judgment. 

[Mirosae]

Really interesting thread!  I also appreciate your input about paints Rich.  I just don't see that this picture, if original, could be anything but completely restored to the point where everything was gone over again.  I also think that if it was restored they did not do a very good job.  If I were to take this information into account and also the conflicting information that was coming from the gallery I would pass on this one IMO.  I guess it would be cool to know (if purchased) the original was under the restoration but the overall feeling of the piece has a completely different vibe than the image on the magazine cover.  I also don't think the possible explanation of the missing line next to the signature holds up.  The restorer must have looked at the original magazine cover and saw there were clearly lines on both sides of the signature.  This painting kind of reminds me of how some of the S2 reproductions came out on the classic movie posters that were hand pulled.  Some are great, others miss the mark.

When I got my original art for the JAWS 2 THAI poster and compared it to the actual poster, NOTHING was out of place except for color differences due to printing.  This is obviously because the painting was not restored, but I don't see much of anything that lines up with these 2 images on the small detail level.  Again this is all IMO.

And Rich that 1940 pastel you have is just gorgeous!

Very helpful Mike. Your Thai poster is splendid and certainly one which I  would be delighted to own too.

[Mirosae]

because to most people, trying to find the magazine would be at best, difficult

you can't just presume everything is easy. Try to find a copy of this specific issue this week, and let me know if you were successful.

it's also possible the people who owned it may not have even known what it was. Maybe they found it at a flea market 40 years ago.

+ Good point. It has taken me over 10 years to find a "cover" - only that.  I hope I will be able to upgrade and find a better copy of the magazine. But I am not in a hurry.

Also a final thought from me. My own personal conundrum. Some of us are emotional collectors, and would undoubtely find it difficult to make rational choices when it comes to posters or pieces like this.

Rationally I have considered the odds of finding something like this but on paper at a price I can afford. It is not looking good. But I need to find "my right" choice.

On balance I have decided not to go for this..but my heart finds it difficult to let it go...just because...oh boy...it is gorgeous.

I shall  leave you now with that thought. The emotional Vs rational decision. Great fun.

Be good

[50s]

man can you be a dumbass sometimes

I understand, what you really want to tell the world about your fashion indiscretions:

[BruceH]

I say there is zero chance it is the original to the magazine cover, and a tiny chance it is more than a few years old.

Probably done by a starving artist type.

I stand corrected. There may well be an original pastel under this restoration, and if the seller says so, I have no reason to doubt it. I bought a number of items from this seller many years ago when I was an eBay seller, and I never once received a purchase I was unhappy with.

I would say that the restoration is surely extensive, and may well cover large portions of the original, and I would be astounded if the restorer referred to an original (or a digital image of the original) when they performed their restoration, which is why I thought there was zero chance it was original. This is a case where seeing an image of the unrestored original would be worth many thousands of words.

[Mirosae]

I stand corrected. There may well be an original pastel under this restoration, and if the seller says so, I have no reason to doubt it. I bought a number of items from this seller many years ago when I was an eBay seller, and I never once received a purchase I was unhappy with.

I would say that the restoration is surely extensive, and may well cover large portions of the original, and I would be astounded if the restorer referred to an original (or a digital image of the original) when they performed their restoration, which is why I thought there was zero chance it was original.This is a case where seeing an image of the unrestored original would be worth many thousands of words.

Agreed. I posted a couple of months ago somewhere else on this forum a photo of this artist in his studio, but unfortunately i couldnt find any images of this particular original and unrestored artwork.

There are photos of poster artists with their original art ( like Anton Grot with his Thief of Bagdad
Now..imagine finding this original artwork)  

Anton Grot with his original artwork