Author Topic: S2 vs The "Real Deal"  (Read 27506 times)

Offline CSM

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 12567
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2014, 11:36:18 PM »
Hard to imagine that the heaviest of those presses (from the 1860s) weighs in at 11 TONS!   :o

But I bet that hefty weight has some correlation with the quality of the build (and so why these pressing are still operable today!)
Chris

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #26 on: January 18, 2014, 12:16:47 AM »
But I bet that hefty weight has some correlation with the quality of the build (and so why these pressing are still operable today!)

No doubt, Chris... solid state in every way... but that sheer weight is pretty mind boggling... for ONE press alone. Think about the flooring structure to be able to support that--especially when new, back in 1860!

 ;)

« Last Edit: January 18, 2014, 12:18:25 AM by erik1925 »


-Jeff

Offline MoviePosterBid.com

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 10339
    • MoviePosterBid.com only movie memorabilia
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #27 on: January 18, 2014, 02:23:29 AM »
one of these presses, I think it was the main one, is the same type of press that Toulouse Lautrec used for his prints.
I believe it is the massive press and the Lautrec press is one of the two that S2 did not own

Movieposterbid.com is the FIRST All-Movie Poster Auction Site. We're not #1, but we try harder
"LIKE" MoviePosterBid.com on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Movieposterbidcom

-------

Offline crowzilla

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
    • Kaiju Poster Database
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2014, 01:06:37 AM »
I wonder when they started using the French Voirin press, as Mel's certificate for the one he purchased just two years ago states that it was printed on a German Dufa press. If that's the "heart" of the operation, it seems they haven't had their heart very long - or at least don't use it for everything.

The Online Reference to Japanese Sci-Fi Posters:
www.Kaijuposters.com

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2016, 12:52:33 PM »
Simes, take a look in this thread, too, for some close up side by side detail shots from The Mummy S2 vs the original OS.

Again, these kinds of variations exist on all the S2s. None are mirror copies of the originals.


-Jeff

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2017, 02:15:59 AM »
by the way.. those 2 presses now reside just down the street from where I live.
the company that bought the S2Art remains through the auction is a hop, skip and a jump from here. They maintain a gallery location on Valley View.

Rich, are the presses used by the (then) new owners? Or just on display? They must be something to see, in person.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 02:19:42 AM by erik1925 »


-Jeff

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #31 on: May 25, 2017, 02:29:54 AM »
A quick Google search produced this find. It seems that the original S2 lithographs are still being produced withe the same presses and attention to detail.

The new company is called Rue Royale Fine Art and their site (and store of various poster prints) can be found here:

http://www.rueroyalefinearts.com/

This part of their site might most appeal to some members here:   thumbsup.gif

http://www.rueroyalefinearts.com/shop/posters/art-of-the-movies/
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 02:30:57 AM by erik1925 »


-Jeff

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #32 on: June 09, 2017, 01:51:58 PM »
This alone shows how much better the OG is. In the S2, she looks like she got punched in the face/designed by a daybill pro. (Sorry, Chris...had to).


Poor Zita. Her ear also looks like a growth coming out of her jawbone.  Doh.gif

She could have been "recreated" much better, that's for sure.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 01:58:22 PM by erik1925 »


-Jeff

Offline eatbrie

  • Administrator
  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 12303
    • My Posters
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #33 on: June 09, 2017, 02:51:30 PM »
These S2 are just the worst, imo.  If one MUST own a copy of these rare posters, find a jpg, go to Kinko's and blow it up.  Much, much better than one of those S2s.

T
My Personal Collection


- I wish to thank all APF members for being part of the World's Largest Social Gathering of Movie Poster Collectors
- "Wishing you the best of luck with All Poster Forum and in encouraging others to appreciate the magical art of film posters" - Martin Scorsese (2009)

Online Neo

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 4369
    • My photobucket
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2017, 05:05:41 PM »
 The old school printing process and story with the S2s are cool, but wow.  They really dropped the ball, in various aspects on that "recreation."
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 05:22:14 PM by Neo »

Offline Starling

  • Collector
  • ***
  • Posts: 737
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #35 on: June 09, 2017, 08:47:38 PM »
I've seen like 8 in person, and they look phenomenal in my opinion.

Offline archstanton

  • Hobbyist
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #36 on: June 09, 2017, 11:15:03 PM »
Big fan of the S2's myself.  Next best thing from having an original.  I don't care that they aren't 100% accurate copies of the original artwork -- they were completely redrawn from scratch so of course they'll be a bit different.  I like that these modern artists were able to capture the spirit of these old classics and do it in a way faithful to the originals, and the litho colors pop wonderfully on the thick paper.

I don't have millions lying around to blow on posters (and if I did I wouldn't blow it on posters) so I'll never have an original Universal monster one sheet. 

guest4955

  • Guest
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #37 on: June 10, 2017, 01:18:21 AM »
Neo, T, and Jeff:



S2s are "rock star" art prints! In Round 1, I bought 8 at $300 a piece and they were worth every penny.

As I posted here, I just bought 12 at $125, a great bargain:

http://www.allposterforum.com/index.php/topic,3518.msg221459.html#msg221459

As noted above, they are nearly as good as the originals for 1% of the price. The colors are amazing. Everybody I've showed them to has praised them, including an apartment social in DC and my office colleagues.

EMP and HA have sold lots of them, usually for more the original retail price. Both are selling them in their upcoming major/signature auctions.

But let my pics speak for themselves:











Again the dealer's much-better pics are posted here:

http://www.allposterforum.com/index.php/topic,3518.msg221459.html#msg221459

Offline eatbrie

  • Administrator
  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 12303
    • My Posters
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #38 on: June 10, 2017, 01:24:50 AM »
A reprint is a reprint.  You can call it a limited edition re-creation, it is not an original poster and therefore a reprint.  And if you want to call them art, then they are forgeries.  Not my thing.

T
« Last Edit: June 10, 2017, 01:57:29 AM by eatbrie »
My Personal Collection


- I wish to thank all APF members for being part of the World's Largest Social Gathering of Movie Poster Collectors
- "Wishing you the best of luck with All Poster Forum and in encouraging others to appreciate the magical art of film posters" - Martin Scorsese (2009)

Online 50s

  • Curator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5630
  • Steve
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #39 on: June 10, 2017, 02:01:54 AM »
That face is rubbish


Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #40 on: June 10, 2017, 02:04:06 AM »
The old school printing process and story with the S2s are cool, but wow.  They really dropped the ball, in various aspects on that "recreation."

Your had the smarts (and eyes) to see and realize I was talking about a very specific element (Zita Johann's comparative imagery) on The Mummy poster, Brandon, and also realized I wasn't commenting At All about the litho process or the print quality overall.

Good on you.   cool1

Even though re-drawn, the artist didn't do her justice on the S2 re-creation, imho.

« Last Edit: June 10, 2017, 02:22:19 AM by erik1925 »


-Jeff

guest4955

  • Guest
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #41 on: June 10, 2017, 05:48:32 AM »
A reprint is a reprint.  You can call it a limited edition re-creation, it is not an original poster and therefore a reprint.  And if you want to call them art, then they are forgeries.  Not my thing.

T

We'll have to "agree to disagree" on this.

I'll add that most of the original artwork used to create the S2s had been in the "public domain" for decades by the time they were recreated/printed in 2002. (The one exception is maybe The Sting.) Thus, they were not "forgeries."

This awesome - yet totally unsolicited - legal analysis was provided by:


Online Neo

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 4369
    • My photobucket
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #42 on: June 10, 2017, 12:52:13 PM »
Your had the smarts (and eyes) to see and realize I was talking about a very specific element (Zita Johann's comparative imagery) on The Mummy poster, Brandon, and also realized I wasn't commenting At All about the litho process or the print quality overall.

Good on you.   cool1

Even though re-drawn, the artist didn't do her justice on the S2 re-creation, imho.

You are too kind, Jefe.

I recall you mentioning some of the cool things about the S2s. As that side by side photo clearly shows, though, there was clearly a lack of attention to detail in some aspects. Arguably they missed the most important mark of recreating that legendary piece.

I've heard tattoo guys say that portraits are very difficult, because one incorrect feature can make someone's portrait unrecognizable, and completely change the vibe.  There are other similar things going on, if you look closely at the differences from the original, also.

Online Neo

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 4369
    • My photobucket
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #43 on: June 10, 2017, 12:57:56 PM »
The framed gallery of them S2s looks good.  After seeing that side by side photo above, I wonder what a framed gallery of "regular" repros would look like. The S2s are probably better in some ways, with their production process, and many people would probably prefer the S2s for that and other reasons.

Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #44 on: June 10, 2017, 12:59:58 PM »
You are too kind, Jefe.

I recall you mentioning some of the cool things about the S2s. As that side by side photo clearly shows, though, there was clearly a lack of attention to detail in some aspects. Arguably they missed the most important mark of recreating that legendary piece.

I've heard tattoo guys say that portraits are very difficult, because one incorrect feature can make someone's portrait unrecognizable, and completely change the vibe.  There are other similar things going on, if you look closely at the differences from the original, also.

Well said, Brandon.

We all know that S2s are NOT reproductions of the original OS art. If someone wants that, those are readily available, in undersized (24x36) versions, in many cases. And yes, artists re-drew the art - no tracing or anything of that nature was done. I think Karloff looks pretty amazing and spot on, in the c/u side by side.

Same can be said of many of the others. The artwork is mighty fine, the colors vivid and the print quality top notch. But Johann got smacked with a lazy hand and, thus, the ugly stick. Its happens. Had her image not been based or compared to an original of any kind, it would have stood on its own.


-Jeff

guest4955

  • Guest
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2017, 01:44:14 PM »
.... I wonder what a framed gallery of "regular" repros would look like....

You can do repros the "right" way but most collectors don't have the technical skill/software/drive to do it right.

1) Find an XL unwatermarked image of the poster you want to print.

2) Convert the image to a lossless format, tiff, png, psd, etc.

3) Digitally repair its fold lines/defects/color issues in Photoshop.

4) "Blow up" the image to 5000 pixels height with after-market Pshop additions like:

https://www.alienskin.com/blowup/

5) Take to a professional printer.

I did this 5-6 times back in Round 1. The posters looked great! My favorites:

Printed 27x41 This Gun For Hire (combo of HS and 1S)



Small version of cleaned-up BoF image:



Printed at 27x41 and displayed at office 2013 Halloween party:



Offline erik1925

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 20330
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2017, 02:11:59 PM »
In looking again, at the side by side of The Mummy (full poster), I now wonder of the S2 artist does perhaps use a traced or other digital image of the original, in order to re-create the right size, scale and placement. In looking at small things like the hands on Karloff's chest, the placement and layout looks almost identical.

This would make sense, and then the S2 artist makes it his own creation by adding his own artistic "eye" & details to the "bare bones."




-Jeff

Online Neo

  • Hoarder
  • ****
  • Posts: 4369
    • My photobucket
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2017, 06:31:00 PM »
You can do repros the "right" way but most collectors don't have the technical skill/software/drive to do it right.

1) Find an XL unwatermarked image of the poster you want to print.

2) Convert the image to a lossless format, tiff, png, psd, etc.

3) Digitally repair its fold lines/defects/color issues in Photoshop.

4) "Blow up" the image to 5000 pixels height with after-market Pshop additions like:

https://www.alienskin.com/blowup/

5) Take to a professional printer.


Those look very high quality.  However, they have the "too good to be true" look, of course.  Lawl.  I think the "wear" that older stuff gets over the years gives them a different vibe, as well as the look of older style production processes, but these are cool in a different way.  Personally, I'm not a big fan of editing, which is partially why I got into film photography, as it has more of a timeless look, imo.

Anyway, good tutorial there for folks who want to do that.  Nice work.  thumbup thumbup
« Last Edit: June 10, 2017, 06:33:17 PM by Neo »

guest4955

  • Guest
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2017, 06:41:33 PM »
Those look very high quality.  However, they have the "too good to be true" look, of course.  Lawl.  I think the "wear" that older stuff gets over the years gives them a different vibe, as well as the look of older style production processes, but these are cool in a different way....

Thanks. I want my repros to match what came out of NSS back in the day, which means they look "minty white."


guest4955

  • Guest
Re: S2 vs The "Real Deal"
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2017, 06:47:22 PM »
In looking again, at the side by side of The Mummy (full poster), I now wonder of the S2 artist does perhaps use a traced or other digital image of the original, in order to re-create the right size, scale and placement. In looking at small things like the hands on Karloff's chest, the placement and layout looks almost identical.

This would make sense, and then the S2 artist makes it his own creation by adding his own artistic "eye" & details to the "bare bones."



Jeff, wasn't the poster on the right (the original) heavily-damaged and heavily-restored b4 it sold for $435K in 1997? Could have sworn I read that back in the day but the "Google God" returns no info. What parts of the original were restored and how did that restorer know what it originally looked like?

https://www.theguardian.com/film/gallery/2012/mar/14/10-most-expensive-film-posters-in-pictures

PS Just noticed Wikipedia uses the S2 version! Who will fix that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy_(1932_film)#/media/File:The_Mummy_1932_film_poster.jpg