Author Topic: Probable solution to Woodstock Style C one-sheet poster mystery! (Read 12795 times)

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #25 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:16:12 PM »

Here's what he told me a year ago when I questioned him about it:

Its the paper that sells it for me - 100% vintage. I took a little look on the logo, its cleveland,ohio, LPIU local 412 something or another. Its clear but very small, you need a mag-glass. Believe me, I have owned THOUSANDS of one sheets, I have seen all out there - its a nice sheet.… Anyone who says 'Very Dubious' has never seen an old roll of NSS posters. I was at a ski resort years ago and bought a 50-count roll of 1975 'Lucky Lady' of all things. I know unfolded 1970's prints are a little weird but they DO show up every now & then. Its no knockoff, I am SURE of that. I'll get it right to you - let me know what YOU think. I weighed it, measured it, mag-glassed it - it passes all tests, don't know what else to say….

[T]he 64.99 one is 'near mint' - I paid a little extra to get really clean 'mint' ones - the roll had edge damage. What happened is a projectionist died in Nashville, he had a roll of the things, his friend was a poster collector & he traded a bunch of them last winter to every poster dealer on eBay - if he saw a poster he liked, he would just trade 'Woodstocks' for them. Anyways - great sheet - 100% unused - I am sure you'll really liked the authenticity! Really nice pieces! the market will absorb eventually - its nice to get one before gone!

True enough, he sold out of his stock long ago. Only a couple of sellers have any left. Ever poster sold has some "soft folds" or noticeable damage.

Cj · « **Reply #26 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:17:23 PM »

I just did an ebay search for these things and it seems that I was wrong Mel, about 123-liquidations being the primary source for these posters and I apologize. It appears that Bradburied, Tloceposters and Rokmodataol has a large inventory of them as well.

Bruce · « **Reply #27 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:19:04 PM »

"It appears that Bradburied, Tloceposters and Rokmodataol has a large inventory of them as well. "

Bruce

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #28 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:29:56 PM »

Yep, like I said, it's being sold by some disreputable sellers, which doesn't bode well for its originality, but that's very old news....

rokmodataol's story:

THIS POSTER WOULD NORMALLY SELL FOR $300-$400, IT WAS PROBABLY THE RAREST WOODSTOCK POSTER ESPECIALLY ROLLED, HOWEVER, A STUDIO EXEC FOUND A LARGE FLAT OF THEM AND THE MARKET IS NOW FLOODED WITH THEM. I BELIEVE THEY WILL GO BACK UP TO THE $300 PRICE AFTER ALL THE INVENTORY THAT US SELLERS BOUGHT (THAT WE EACH WE WERE LED TO BELIEVE EXCLUSIVELY) STARTS TO THIN OUT

Cj · « **Reply #29 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:36:06 PM »

So who's story do you believe?

Thy guy with 600 positive feedback who said they came from a nashville projectionist or the guy with 9150 positive feedbacks who said a studio exec found an entire flat of them?

CSM · « **Reply #30 on:** August 21, 2011, 11:55:37 PM »

This is my solution:

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #31 on:** August 22, 2011, 12:02:52 AM »

I believe what I see - a 27x41 poster that is identical to a known original except for an odd "C" notation and with a perfect microscopic logo of a union that ceased existence in 1972. It is certainly not any kind of digital reproduction.

CineMasterpieces · « **Reply #32 on:** August 22, 2011, 01:45:45 AM »

"I believe what I see - a 27x41 poster that is identical to a known original except for an odd "C" notation and with a perfect microscopic logo of a union that ceased existence in 1972. It is certainly not any kind of digital reproduction."

bingo

Bruce · « **Reply #33 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:54:52 AM »

Then WHY do both of you refuse to let me and Todd Spoor pay to have it tested (which will not damage it) so your point of you can be vindicated?

Bruce

stewart boyle · « **Reply #34 on:** August 22, 2011, 07:23:30 AM »

I notice on Mels style c that the lettering for 3 days etc is very speckled,these white speckles seem to extend into the bottom half of the guitar emblem.
Can anyone explain what might have caused this?

Stew

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #35 on:** August 22, 2011, 07:59:59 AM »

Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2011, 06:54:52 AM

Then WHY do both of you refuse to let me and Todd Spoor pay to have it tested (which will not damage it) so your point of you can be vindicated?

Bruce

Bruce, I said I would send mine to him. I sent you an email asking for Todd Spoor's address. However, it seems that he'd also have to test another Woodstock Style B to make a valid comparison.

My copy has no flecking anywhere on the poster except for a spot on the "M." Bruce's and Dave's copies do show severe flecking. Mine:

Bruce's:

Dave's:

archie leach · « **Reply #36 on:** August 22, 2011, 08:01:28 AM »

Quote from: stewart boyle on August 22, 2011, 07:23:30 AM

I notice on Mels style c that the lettering for 3 days etc is very speckled,these white speckles seem to extend into the bottom half of the guitar emblem.
Can anyone explain what might have caused this?

Very small elves with paint brushes...

Bruce · « **Reply #37 on:** August 22, 2011, 08:10:09 AM »

It is super odd that the one I was consigned has Style C on it, but it is a teaser, and confirmed original style B's have credits, but these suspect posters are style C's with credits. Why in the world would they have made two DIFFERENT style C's in 1970?

Add in that the repro boys all have these, and that NO ONE had ever seen one prior to the recent surfacing of oodles of them, and you have a bad smell about the whole thing.

It is great that Mel will send his in for testing!

Bruce

stewart boyle · « **Reply #38 on:** August 22, 2011, 08:48:23 AM »

Sorry Mel..i guess i got confused by all the different images

Stew

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #39 on:** August 22, 2011, 11:28:19 AM »

I've agreed to send mine to Todd Spoor for testing.

Tune in next month - same Bat time, some Bat channel!

movieposterstudio · « **Reply #40 on:** August 22, 2011, 04:40:34 PM »

Quote from: Dread_Pirate_Mel on August 22, 2011, 07:59:59 AM

Bruce, I said I would send mine to him. I sent you an email asking for Todd Spoor's address. However, it seems that he'd also have to test another Woodstock Style B to make a valid comparison.

Mel, Since I’m the one who supplied you with the Style B image, and have been reassuring you offlist that Todd won’t tear your Style C to shreds, it would hardly be fair if I didn’t send my Style B to CSI MPGrading to help with the comparison! It will take a while longer to get there, though, as I’m in the UK.

Paul

CSM · « **Reply #41 on:** August 22, 2011, 05:13:14 PM »

Another comment - can Todd's equipment really be sensitive enough to detect the difference in paper age when there is only an approx 35 year gap in disputed printing times? I, of course, am not an expert but it seems like a very small window when radio carbon dating uses an error factor of +/- 40 years for samples younger than 10,000 years...

Dread_Pirate_Mel · « **Reply #42 on:** August 22, 2011, 05:27:49 PM »

Quote from: movieposterstudio on August 22, 2011, 04:40:34 PM

Mel, Since I’m the one who supplied you with the Style B image, and have been reassuring you offlist that Todd won’t tear your Style C to shreds, it would hardly be fair if I didn’t send my Style B to CSI MPGrading to help with the comparison! It will take a while longer to get there, though, as I’m in the UK.

Paul

Thanks Paul. If your poster has the same age/type paper, that would certainly go a long way to prove its authenticity.

And Chris I don't understand all the details of the testing either. "Mongo just pawn in game of life."

CSM · « **Reply #43 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:02:14 PM »

Quote from: Dread_Pirate_Mel on August 22, 2011, 05:27:49 PM

Thanks Paul. If your poster has the same age/type paper, that would certainly go a long way to prove its authenticity.

And Chris I don't understand all the details of the testing either. "Mongo just pawn in game of life."

We shall see and hopefully - whatever the results are - they can be explained and substantiated clearly to all us peons...

ddilts399 · « **Reply #44 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:23:12 PM »

Quote from: CSM on August 22, 2011, 05:13:14 PM

Another comment - can Todd's equipment really be sensitive enough to detect the difference in paper age when there is only an approx 35 year gap in disputed printing times? I, of course, am not an expert but it seems like a very small window when radio carbon dating uses an error factor of +/- 40 years for samples younger than 10,000 years...

This is my issue with this whole process as well, would like a scientific write-up and not a "because this lab said so" explanation.

raulleaf · « **Reply #45 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:39:32 PM »

Quote from: CSM on August 22, 2011, 05:13:14 PM

Another comment - can Todd's equipment really be sensitive enough to detect the difference in paper age when there is only an approx 35 year gap in disputed printing times? I, of course, am not an expert but it seems like a very small window when radio carbon dating uses an error factor of +/- 40 years for samples younger than 10,000 years...

I asked my self this same question. Maybe he is going to compare paper type material etc...

archie leach · « **Reply #46 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:41:52 PM »

According to a MOPO post, I thought he said that it had to do with the type of paper used throughout the US, which switched to a higher alkaline mix on the late '80s.

Low alkaline levels would indicate that the poster was printed before the late '80s, high levels after...

movieposterstudio · « **Reply #47 on:** August 22, 2011, 06:59:15 PM »

Quote from: archie leach on August 22, 2011, 06:41:52 PM

According to a MOPO post, I thought he said that it had to do with the type of paper used throughout the US, which switched to a higher alkaline mix on the late '80s.

Low alkaline levels would indicate that the poster was printed before the late '80s, high levels after...

Yes, there's an indication of the process in Todd's presentation linked from the MPGrading site (page 23 onwards) -
http://www.slideshare.net/MPGrading/mp-grading-tradeshow-presentation-8245733

Paul

Bruce · « **Reply #48 on:** August 22, 2011, 07:04:54 PM »

You guys are essentially correct. The paper type switched in the mid-1960s and again in the late 1970s, enough so that you can test the paper and know that it is from on of those eras or not. So in this case, you can know if it is from the 1980s or later, and that is good enough in this case to know it is or is not original.

I talked to Todd on the phone today and he explained that they have received a highly suspect Pulp Fiction, but that in that case there is no "paper test" to tell the difference between 1994 and 2011, so they have to use other methods for that poster.

Bruce

Bruce · « **Reply #49 on:** August 22, 2011, 07:09:17 PM »

P.S. I hope you guys appreciate all the effort Todd Spoor and others have put into this. No one is getting rich off of this, and they could all just forget about trying to "get things right" and just list fakes as real like SOME sellers do.

It is the efforts of Todd (and everyone else who tries to get to the bottom of things) that has done so much to improve this hobby.

Bruce

News: