The case for "survivor" status for posters

[jayn_j]

In much of the collector hobbies, there seems to be a respected subclass called 'survivor' where the object is not restored, but is presented in its condition as found.  A great example is the Stutz Bearcat that Wayne Carini (Chasing Classic cars) purchased, cleaned up, and won the survivor class at the Pebble Beach Concours.


We don't tend to do that in the movie paper hobby.  Instead we value something that it 80% new paper and dipped in paint over something that shows its age and history?  Why is a staple hole or small tear such a negative ding on value and respect?  I don't think I am talking about the 40 billionth iteration of a common poster here, but stuff that is uncommon probably should be more valued for what it is than restoring it to what it never was.

Looking for discussion here.  How do you value the history of your collection as opposed to how it displays?

[MoviePosterBid.com]

I vote for originality

[martinc]

I think that things like pinholes and minor tears, and even yellowing of paper and faded colours to some degree, can add to the "character" of older posters. I also like it when, as on US window cards for example, you get the old handwritten names of movie theatres and dates of showing  - it kind of evokes the time and place in which that particular poster was on display. I suppose it appeals to the nostalgia for a lost era and that feeling you get when you are watching films from the 30s that all the actors are gone and you are watching ghosts really.

Our hobby is a new one when compared to something like book collecting, for example. One generation's interest can have an opposite effect on the following one: collecting books with dustwrappers only became a priority for some because so many earlier book owners mishandled them or threw them away because they were not valued and as a result they became scarce. Maybe future poster collectors will value unrestored posters more because they feel that linen-backing and restoration took away too much character of the originals, and then creased, folded posters with minor tears will come into vogue - who knows?   

[erik1925]

This is the poster I referred to in my post above, that I had backed because the folds were very weak and the paper was also quite brittle.

It's a French poster for the US movie, The Man Who Lived Twice (1936). Ive posted this image before, but I only had it backed. No retouching was done, I left the upper right corner missing, as it was when I got it, and if you look very closely along the top horizontal fold line, a few, very small holes (fold breaks) can be seen. I also left those alone, too.

The backing was done Only to stabilize the poster. It was also de-acidified and washed to remove dirt and adjust the pH of the more acidic paper.

[Communicationsguy]

Personally, I am a firm believer that "less is more" when it comes to poster restoration. With that being said there are many pragmatic circumstances when a poster should be stabilized with the use of the linen backing process, or tape stains airbrushed or stains beached out. In many cases, I try to preserve the look and feel of the original poster, especially the flaws. For example, we just linen backed a three sheet for the film The Happiest Millionaire. The two pieces were about a half inch out from lining up, the worst I have ever seen. We adjusted the title so it lined up, but left the borders exactly the way they were. I think it adds character to the piece and preserves the era with which it was printed.

Again, I do believe man made damage can and in most cases should be fixed, like writing in the borders, a mustache drawn on the image, staining, trimming, etc. Posters from Quebec are legendary for having the English title painted out and replaced in French. This should be fixed.

I really enjoy a poster that is as authentic as possible.

Cheers, Dan Miles, Backingtothefuture.

[Antoine1973]

I'm with everyone on this thread, I always prefer the less-is-more treatment when dealing with old movie posters.  I think linen-backing should only be done when it's necessary to preserve the integrity of the poster and without any additional retouching to the image.  I like the the treatment done to Man Who Live Twice that Jeff posted.  I really don't mind minor flaws such as fold lines, fold separations, missing corners, etc...  To me, such scars give character to a poster and are testimony to its age.  Personally, I don't really care for making something that's over 60 year-old look brand new, it just doesn't look right to me.