There are a couple of painterly posters for Hallows prt2 from India (and I think there were 4'x6' versions as well)... this is the one sheet, not sure if it's painted or computer manipulated.
But I do agree with Brude here, Star Wars poster art is in another league, that's not saying in 10-20 years time the Harry Potter generation is not spending serious money on Potter paper.
Have been doing my research on the Azkaban lenticular and found this interesting website and information, sounds similar to what people have been saying...
-
Link:
http://pwp.att.net/p/s/community.dll?ep=16&ext=1&groupid=218855&ck="Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban"
This is without a doubt the rarest poster I own. It is a lenticular teaser poster, as you move around the poster Sirius Black disappears from your view leaving an empty space (you can tell his shoulder and arm have started to disappear in the image). The thing that makes this poster so very rare is that only 6 were made. That's right, only 6 are in the entire world.
November of 2003, Warner Brothers was about to release their teaser posters for "Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban". Curiously, rather than releasing the expected Teaser posters instead they sent out a cardboard standee to be displayed in movie theater lobbies right before Thanksgiving. This standee was in the form of a lamp pole and on the lamp pole was a Wanted sign. This Wanted sign was made of cardboard and in the middle of the cardboard was a small lenticular card of Sirius Black. When you walked by, Sirius disappeared from sight. The full cardboard sign measured at 17 x 26 inches, while the removable lenticular card measured at 14 x 19 inches. After several months of waiting for a teaser poster of this movie to be released, around March of 2004 we were instead treated to the Final poster with the 3 kid's faces on it. Why didn't Warner's go ahead and release a full sized teaser poster for this movie? The other two Harry Potter movies had teaser posters. The gentleman, whom I purchased this from, gives us the story why:
"We had been given the go ahead to test run a full size lenticular poster for the third Harry Potter film, but right as they we going to press, WB canceled the order. We had to halt press in the middle of the job. Since lenticulation is a multi-step process, none of the run was completed, and they were all ordered to be destroyed; however, a few of us who run the actual machinery decided to finish the process on a few posters to use as samples for our other clients to see, so that they would have a reference piece to be able to judge whether lenticulation was suitable for their advertising or marketing needs. There are only six of these in the world. Nobody at Warner Bros. got one because they canceled the run. They changed some text info at the bottom of a similar image and opted for the mini 5x7 versions, which are much cheaper to produce. The holographic ones in the standees are foil printed and relatively cheap to manufacture. Just to give you an idea of why Warner probably opted to not use a full size poster, I can tell you that developing a template for the motion on this poster cost them over ten thousand dollars. That's before a single poster was ever printed to plastic. If they had ordered a run of 2000, it would have had an additional cost of $100 each. The cost of producing a smaller run is almost exponentially more expensive, because it ties up the machinery preventing other work from being done. Warner knew that the same amount of people would turn out for the next Harry Potter film regardless of what poster was used, so there was no need to incur gigantic costs on special posters. So essentially, the poster you have, cost over $10,000 to produce, in marketing and developing fees. I was not joking when I stated that this was the single rarest Harry Potter collectible. J.K. Rowling doesn't even own one."
-
I think I'm going to have to back out of my comment 'I think I may have a stab at this poster', the phrase out-of-my-league springs to mind
