All Poster Forum

Common Poster Subjects => Auction House, Dealer & Other Seller Experiences => Topic started by: wonka on November 17, 2017, 12:21:00 PM

Title: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on November 17, 2017, 12:21:00 PM
I realize this has been discussed several times across several forums over the years but want to resurrect the topic, if nothing else, as a friendly reminder to folks who have been around for a long time in the hobby as well as being a public service announcement for new folks, guests, and the like.

HA's condition descriptions, at least with posters, are basically meaningless if not a downright lie at times...especially with posters that have ANY issues.
I recently grabbed this Indy ToD UK OS (thanks to members with the heads up) that I posted in the wanteds here:

http://www.allposterforum.com/index.php/topic,12462.0.html (http://www.allposterforum.com/index.php/topic,12462.0.html)

Bought this the other week from HA:

 https://movieposters.ha.com/itm/adventure/indiana-jones-and-the-temple-of-doom-paramount-1984-british-one-sheet-27-x-40-adventure/a/161745-51217.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515 (https://movieposters.ha.com/itm/adventure/indiana-jones-and-the-temple-of-doom-paramount-1984-british-one-sheet-27-x-40-adventure/a/161745-51217.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515)

Poster arrived today and its a small disaster, nothing near their usual "Rolled, Fine+". There is nothing 'fine' about it, and while the photo shows a few tears and tatters, the poster in question is nothing like the visual depiction...its almost a completely different poster.  I would even allege that the photo is perhaps doctored up with a few quick visual adjustments by some intern there in Dallas...several rips on the borders are almost impossible to see in the pic, which as I look now seems to have been manipulated with some lighting or bloom effects.  Will post a pic of the actual thing in hand when I can.  I only paid $130something plus ship so will hold onto it until I find another to replace.

Regardless, I would be very careful with HA in this regard...not sure if they are lazy, intentionally misleading, or both...even ebay jackassery doesn't get to this level most of the time, and there's no BP to pay either.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Tob on November 17, 2017, 02:56:21 PM
That’s disappointing to hear :( curious to see how your photos compare.

I know you’re an Indy expert, so do you know if there are any tells between a real one and the rolled 27 x 40” reprints that seem to be out there? Is it just printing sharpness and paper age/feel?
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: eatbrie on November 17, 2017, 03:32:20 PM
You should post pictures side by side so we can all compare, because if the poster has been retouched, Grey should be made aware of it. 

Also, Grey will reimburse you immediately should you decide not to keep the poster.  I have emailed the guy at 8pm PST on a Sunday (10pm his time), he emails back immediately and makes you feel you're the most important person in the room.

T
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: MoviePosterBid.com on November 17, 2017, 04:12:57 PM
I can't stress this enough: grading can be subjective, especially when all dealers do not adhere to a common definition scale.

For instance, except for one dealer, everyone I know uses a C rating scale that goes from Poor to Near Mint. The one dealer who does not adhere to this scale has a proprietary scale that tops out at Fine, like book sellers do.

Everyone except for one dealer uses common terms to describe folded or rolled posters. One dealer calls rolled posters 'unfolded' which almost every other dealer says is incorrect, because that definition indicates an item was previously folded and is now rolled. A poster that has never been folded, cannot properly be described as unfolded by any dictionary definition. It is an incorrect description.

So with such disparities, it creates wildly varying specifications and until all dealers adopt a singular scale, such as have comic books, baseball cards, coins, stamps, book sellers etc, there will never be a time that everyone can mutually agree with anything.

Of course, there is a solution, which is that we all post grading definition scales on our websites to help the buyers decipher our meanings. That way, even with varying scales to some degree we can make a collector aware of what they can expect when they actually get our merchandise delivered.

Like T, I am curious to see pics of the poster in question
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on November 17, 2017, 04:18:04 PM
And if you spent $130.00 on this poster and arent happy, maybe just send it back if you feel it was mis-described or not shown the way you expected?

Were it a 10.00 poster i would likely keep it too, and wait for another to appear, but 130.00 is a nice little chunk of change and could be used for something you'd be totally happy with.

Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: 50s on November 17, 2017, 05:43:41 PM
I bought a $4000 poster over 10 years ago, it was described as NM condition (highest possible on linen) yet it had a larger than fist sized repainted area in a detailed scene. Contacted Grey I think but I wasn't going to go through returning a linen backed 6 sheet from OZ to USA
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on November 17, 2017, 05:45:59 PM
What movie was that for, Steve?

And when you notified Grey/HA about that fixed area that you discovered, what did they tell you?
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: JCM on November 17, 2017, 07:28:46 PM
Funny how the guys who jump at the chance to rip certain dealers to shreds for stuff like this are just like, "Send it back if you don't like it."

Yeah, no shit. That's not the point here.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: guest4955 on November 17, 2017, 07:32:35 PM
I've received 300+ MPs from HA and only one had an incorrect condition description....
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: MoviePosterBid.com on November 17, 2017, 07:44:36 PM
I've received 300+ MPs from HA and only one had an incorrect condition description....

I can go further than that Mel. I've been satisfied with 98% of what I've gotten from professional dealers & auctions and that goes back decades.
That doesn't mean that all dealers can't make a mistake from time to time. The whole deal is whether you are willing to own up to it when you do.

there is also the customer who can never be pleased bit. A package gets lost, all I can do it try to replace or refund the items lost.
One guy recently wanted me to make good on 'expected profits' for when he might finally sell a poster he won in my auctions from a waylaid order that I was able to send duplicates of all but 2 posters, for which he got a refund, plus I included extra posters worth half what the missing posters were. The original package was eventually returned (long story). But he was pissed off because he was expecting to make $50 on one poster.. Not my problem, but what else did you want, beside the $60 in extra posters I gave you anyway? Some buyers can't be pleased.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on November 17, 2017, 08:22:29 PM
Funny how the guys who jump at the chance to rip certain dealers to shreds for stuff like this are just like, "Send it back if you don't like it."

Yeah, no shit. That's not the point here.

Sums it up.

Will try to post pics of the poster tomorrow at some point when its daylight.

And to your points Rich, it goes without saying that not having common procedures across the board for all sellers/dealers is an issue but not THE issue here...calling something with many more rips and issues than even pictured, yet labeled "Rolled, fine+" is bonkers.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on November 17, 2017, 08:24:49 PM
I can go further than that Mel. I've been satisfied with 98% of what I've gotten from professional dealers & auctions and that goes back decades.
That doesn't mean that all dealers can't make a mistake from time to time. The whole deal is whether you are willing to own up to it when you do.

there is also the customer who can never be pleased bit. A package gets lost, all I can do it try to replace or refund the items lost.
One guy recently wanted me to make good on 'expected profits' for when he might finally sell a poster he won in my auctions from a waylaid order that I was able to send duplicates of all but 2 posters, for which he got a refund, plus I included extra posters worth half what the missing posters were. The original package was eventually returned (long story). But he was pissed off because he was expecting to make $50 on one poster.. Not my problem, but what else did you want, beside the $60 in extra posters I gave you anyway? Some buyers can't be pleased.

seriously tho, what's this have to do with literally anything here?
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: eatbrie on November 17, 2017, 08:52:20 PM
I feel bad telling you about the poster, Ben.

T
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: MoviePosterBid.com on November 17, 2017, 10:02:44 PM
And to your points Rich, it goes without saying that not having common procedures across the board for all sellers/dealers is an issue but not THE issue here...calling something with many more rips and issues than even pictured, yet labeled "Rolled, fine+" is bonkers.

well, as I said, it is a definition of terms.
What EMP calls 'Fine' is equal to C-9/10 on MPB. What I call 'Fine' is C-7

In Heritage's case for this poster, the listing does says specifically "It may have tears, creases, minor stains, and/or some soft folds." ergo, those issues should be expected, because they say so in the listing. Moreover, in Heritage's case, they rate 'Fine' as C-6 as noted on their site
https://movieposters.ha.com/tutorial/movieposters-grading.s

obviously, this is another variation in terms between different sellers. It would be good to adopt a general grading definition scale across all dealers, but note that even in comics, cards and coins - unless the same third-party grader (CGC or CBCS) is grading the item and encapsulating it (not possible for our hobby), it still becomes a subjective issue

Ultimately, it becomes necessary in our hobby to understand what to expect from each different auction, generally via experience.

I think I've only been sent back one item that the buyer considered incorrectly graded in the 349 auctions I have run since 2006 (my 350th one is currently running) and the buyer was correct in returning it. It was a Godfather card rated C-9 where I clearly missed some fingernail indentations reducing it to C-7 and at the same time, I sell tons of posters that could be rated C-9/10 or even C-10, but I still only rate them C-9 most of the time, so I don't have to inspect them with a loupe. I think I've rated less than 50 posters C-9/10 or better

but looking at HA's pic, C-6 seems to be a very fair grade. I'd like to see the image you can post

Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on November 18, 2017, 10:17:54 AM
Poster arrived today and its a small disaster, nothing near their usual "Rolled, Fine+". There is nothing 'fine' about it, and while the photo shows a few tears and tatters, the poster in question is nothing like the visual depiction...its almost a completely different poster.

Biggest thing I see with this poster is it looks like while it was rolled it had something heavy on it and there are 8-10 (or more) very visible folds going across the length of the poster, plus some vertical folds.

Fine in Heritage is C-6, and I can't think of a single poster from the 80s onward that I would purchase in C-6 condition, but I guess it could always be a space filler until a nice one comes along.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Harry Caul on November 18, 2017, 11:29:47 AM
I looks like who ever processed that batch of photos crushed the highlights.  If you can't see any texture in the paper then the white point is set too high.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: eatbrie on November 18, 2017, 11:46:35 AM
I was trying to compare it to mine, and something is definitely off.  I'm no expert in photography, but the HA picture has definitely been doctored a bit.

(http://www.eatbrie.com/large_posters_files/Indianajonesandthetempleofdoom42.jpg)(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4544/38470918392_fce523e8cf_h.jpg)

T
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on November 18, 2017, 12:21:36 PM
The overall color looks a bit washed out on the HA photo.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Harry Caul on November 18, 2017, 12:46:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ZI4LZgZ.jpg)(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4544/38470918392_fce523e8cf_h.jpg)

T, I took your image into photoshop.  To get them close-ish I had to boost contrast by 50%, raised exposure a half stop and then increased sharpness 200%.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: CSM on November 18, 2017, 01:07:16 PM
It's been longstanding knowledge that HA clearly "boosts" at least some of their photos...
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on November 18, 2017, 01:21:10 PM
I wonder if the sharpness was raised so that the folds could be better seen?

sometimes it's hard to photograph and get all the defects to show, so is it better to have the tears at the bottom showing or the multiple fold lines throughout the poster showing?
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on November 18, 2017, 03:33:19 PM
I cannot take photos today, but will get it going ASAP and will post soon so you guys can see.

If stuff was taken with natural daylight (yet controlled with indoor set up), that would help a ton. This one was clearly messed with in PS.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Undead on November 20, 2017, 12:16:08 PM
Just about every time I go after a poster there I pretty much always throw the image in photoshop, roll back the contrast and brightness to more normal or even slightly darker levels and the flaws usually pop right out. Will not always work but this has saved both me and a few other collectors I have done it for a few headaches over the years. I highly recommend that if you can, do the same whether HA or any other poster that looks suspect from any dealer.

An example is the above referenced ToD poster with the effects rolled back some, I spent less than two minutes on this so it can definitely be done better. Which is why I am anxiously going to wait on my only purchase from the weekend keeping my fingers crossed.

(http://undead.net/images/posters/temp_doom_comp.jpg)
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on November 25, 2017, 04:31:55 PM
I cannot take photos today, but will get it going ASAP and will post soon so you guys can see.

If stuff was taken with natural daylight (yet controlled with indoor set up), that would help a ton. This one was clearly messed with in PS.

Any pics snapped yet, Ben?   prayer.gif

The suspense is killing us! 
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: AjTheGreat on November 26, 2017, 11:41:45 PM
Erik1925, do you remember when I complained to you about a poster that looked totally different then the pic and rating...reading this thread brought those bad feelings back how.


Any pics snapped yet, Ben?   prayer.gif

The suspense is killing us!
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on December 03, 2017, 01:39:05 PM
Erik1925, do you remember when I complained to you about a poster that looked totally different then the pic and rating...reading this thread brought those bad feelings back how.

Hey Aj, after you reminded me of the title, I did recall the poster.

Plus, you showed me a pic of it, too, pointing out those differences. 



Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 16, 2018, 10:46:41 AM
Apologies for the delay on this, which is at this point excessive on my end to be honest.
We are going through some somewhat major house projects/issues so poster access just isn't happening in the time being...hopefully soon and I'll put up pics here for you guys to see.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: redman on October 01, 2018, 11:35:50 AM
HA didn't change their description/grade so i've copied this from other thread to remind/warn peeps that stevie wonder still helps out at heritage now and again

bit of a joke description/grading from HA here (https://movieposters.ha.com/itm/academy-award-winner/you-can-t-take-it-with-you-columbia-1938-title-lobby-card-11-x-14-academy-award-winners/a/161839-55279.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515)
btw what the hell is airbrushed back? i guess it means painted? jeezus.
i've always thought it a JOKE that HA doesn't show pics of the backs of lobbies and photos
(probably because i remember that i got a lobby from them which was covered in tape... >:( eyeroll)
anyway, back to You Can't Take It With You, i don't see any mention of fading in the description
hmmmm. looks super f-a-d-e-d to me. have a look at recent EMP pic for comparison

(http://funkyimg.com/i/2Lw5B.jpg)

(http://funkyimg.com/i/2Lw5C.jpg)
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on January 05, 2019, 10:28:52 PM
Apologies for the delay on this, which is at this point excessive on my end to be honest.
We are going through some somewhat major house projects/issues so poster access just isn't happening in the time being...hopefully soon and I'll put up pics here for you guys to see.

Since youre back, Ben, maybe we can now finally see the poster that was the basis of this thread?  Here's hoping, anyhow, in the 1+ year since it was started. ;)
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 06, 2019, 07:19:28 PM
I know, I've really dropped the ball here. Ill do my best to get it going this week. I promise. Sorry again...its on me.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: erik1925 on January 26, 2019, 07:40:58 PM
I know, I've really dropped the ball here. Ill do my best to get it going this week. I promise. Sorry again...its on me.

Now Jan 26th....

This thread has been bringing the LOLs, since November of 2017.  HAHA.gif  waiting1  ;)
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: AjTheGreat on February 16, 2019, 06:22:38 PM
Let’s keep the LOL’z going.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on April 02, 2019, 12:17:55 PM
Let’s keep the LOL’z going.

Yes, lets.

I've been living away from home for some time unfortunately, and am not around my posters....one day these pics will make a glorious entrance.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 12:59:22 PM
Since you guys have been logging on every day to see when the pics would arrive...today is the day, yay!

I looked at it once when it arrived and had a few seconds. Since then, we have moved and most of my stuff has been in somewhat of a chaotic unorganized mess...I found the tube, misplaced it again, etc...regardless, It has been so long since I have unrolled it a second time (today) and its borderline ridiculous. Please stop the 'people have different definitions of C6' and so on Rich.  There are 4 severe rips at the bottom, a nice sized one on the right, tatters and lines throughout, etc.

This poster is BS and posting that 'pic' and sending me this is ridiculous. It wasn't a ton of $ and its been literally over two years so I am over it, but I am done with HA and will be sure to send people elsewhere when I can. I appreciate the folks who sent me the link when it was up, I was and am still very grateful. Its been over 10 years trying to find one up to that point and while the search continues, at the very least I paid for my education on avoiding HA. This was an egregious cover up and insulting on every level...I am mad at myself at not making a stink about this when I got it but oh well.

Enjoy:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334625516_f91a342e78_h.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334625486_11c4118c56_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334842517_37911420d8_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334842567_e693ae032d_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334625426_fac5e17d6f_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334625441_f0aaa4a820_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334158883_e36cf50b0b_b.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49334625401_7f8d8ffbe4_b.jpg)

Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 05, 2020, 02:53:38 PM
Finally!
A comparison of what you had to the original photos.
There is no doubt that this poster was overgraded. I don't believe it's a 6, it's probably a 5.
It's been so long, I don't remember what happened when you took T's advice and contacted Grey about it - can you remind us?
(We should probably all take T's advice and not buy any posters after 1980 in less than 9 anyways)
I did a very quick look at the HA picture and circled thing that jumped out at me. It looks like everything you note can be seen in the original HA image.
You just had a problem with the number they assigned to it, yes?
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 03:00:25 PM
The digital flattening of the image and correcting the complete rips and tears, they severely falsified the condition. The circled locations you provided do not read as complete tears, nor did the description read as such. If this is C6-C5 even, then what is a C3 in that regard...6 separate pieces of a poster? If so, time to reevaluate the C system.

I did not contact Grey at all. As I mentioned, the issues of this poster after I received it was waaaaay on the back burner.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 05, 2020, 04:25:38 PM
...The circled locations you provided do not read as complete tears, nor did the description read as such.

Really? this doesn't look like a tear to you?

Quote
If this is C6-C5 even, then what is a C3 in that regard...6 separate pieces of a poster? If so, time to reevaluate the C system.

according to the HA descriptions, C-3 would allow for the poster to be brittle, staining, writing, and have paper loss.
https://movieposters.ha.com/tutorial/movieposters-grading.s
I'm sure the written descriptions would be more useful if they had photo representations. But yes, I agree - it is long past time for a universally used condition scale (though as most will say, nothing takes the place of large photos when you can't see it in person).

Quote
I did not contact Grey at all. As I mentioned, the issues of this poster after I received it was waaaaay on the back burner.
thumbup
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 05:14:28 PM
The four at the bottom are the more egregious and did not appear to be complete separations that curled up the paper 5-6 inches. So, no...not really.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 05, 2020, 05:33:21 PM
The four at the bottom are the more egregious and did not appear to be complete separations that curled up the paper 5-6 inches. So, no...not really.

What is the fourth one?
I see one that stops just below the "original soundtrack" box,
I see a second that obviously goes into the "E" in "Spielberg",
I see a third that obviously goes to the "M" in "Paramount" (and then looks to have later been torn up to the "O" in "George").

All are easily evident (to me at least) in the large scan.
I totally agree that none appear evident in the small image, and that you have to think "why is this graded a 6?" and then inspect the large image.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 05, 2020, 05:39:29 PM
The digital flattening of the image

Also think this is just how it looks when stuck on a vacuum board.
Always wished I had one when I used to sell stuff, makes things so much easier (especially when photographing rolled pieces)
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 07:11:14 PM
If I bought this from EMP you would have been grabbing your pitchfork.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 05, 2020, 07:51:48 PM
I don't agree with HA's description of this poster being a 5.0 either.
Thankfully I can also pull up the large scan and take a look at the defects myself.

Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 09:08:09 PM
Yep, and if that vacuum board is sucking what is actually a tear or rip into what looks like a 'crease' then that would be an issue amirite.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: eatbrie on January 05, 2020, 09:36:39 PM
(We should probably all take T's advice and not buy any posters after 1980 in less than 9 anyways)

THIS IS IT!!!  Post 1980 posters should be mint.  Period.

Why did you even bother to buy a 6, Ben?  Makes no sense to me.  I know you wanted it, but a 6 should always be a no go.  ESPECIALLY post 1980.

And I agree, this is not a 6.  It is really a zero, in my book at least.  Toilet paper poster.

T
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: okiehawker on January 05, 2020, 09:47:06 PM
I hope you find a copy in the condition you want, Ben!  Okie
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 11:12:09 PM
THIS IS IT!!!  Post 1980 posters should be mint.  Period.

Why did you even bother to buy a 6, Ben?  Makes no sense to me.  I know you wanted it, but a 6 should always be a no go.  ESPECIALLY post 1980.

And I agree, this is not a 6.  It is really a zero, in my book at least.  Toilet paper poster.

T

Maybe I need friends that don't send me auction links to a C6.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 05, 2020, 11:12:30 PM
I hope you find a copy in the condition you want, Ben!  Okie

Thanks Okie!
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: eatbrie on January 05, 2020, 11:15:58 PM
Maybe I need friends that don't send me auction links to a C6.

Did I do that?

I don’t remember.

If so, I’m sorry.

And no, I won’t send you mine.

T
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Tang Lung in Rome on January 05, 2020, 11:39:20 PM
Whats C9/NM to one collector might not be the same grade to another
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 06, 2020, 10:01:15 AM
For the record, I bought this poster to tick the box in pencil, not ink. I liked it as a placeholder until I got a mint one as 99.9% of the time I go by the same rule above re: 80s posters, which is definitely the way to go.

The issue is HA refusing to be truthful via both visuals and description. If this is a C6 then the whole scale is broken. Schan you are getting caught up in irrelevant details, 5 rips vs 4, etc...showing a poster sucked against a board is nice to show a flattened image, but is also used to the seller/auction house's advantage in trying to get away with selling torn posters like this.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 06, 2020, 11:36:30 AM
If this is a C6 then the whole scale is broken.

This is the point I agree with - and why I showed an example of the HA 5.0.
If that Dylan poster is a 5.0, then one could argue that your piece is undergraded.

(and I also agreed that when you look at the regular size photo, Indy looks fine. The warning signs are all there on the blow-up, but yes you have to know what you are looking at).

We need consistent grades/grading system that is used by all dealers.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: CSM on January 06, 2020, 02:03:36 PM
Although it is time consuming, why not just describe a poster's flaws in as much detail as possible vs. a blanket grade?  All this "may have this" or "may have that" doesn't help all that much in determining what one is actually buying.

The state of Ben's Indy is ridiculous vs. what the vacuum tabled, colour-boosted picture attempted to convey
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: okiehawker on January 06, 2020, 10:01:28 PM
Hi Ben, I also backlight all linen backed posters I buy from all sources.  We have restoration so amazing now that from just the normal images of the front you just can't see the defects.  I'm glad there is fantastic restoration, and a good backlight is my friend to help see original condition. Fortunately, I've been treated fairly when I've found major undescribed defects. I'm wishing you some good poster mojo!!!   Okie
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Crazy Vick on January 07, 2020, 10:07:30 PM
I hate that they use the word "fine" so early on in their scale.  When I think of fine I think top of the line, like "Fine" art, "fine wine" etc., so the best of art, the best of wine, etc.  I know they also use it to grade comics, but from an etymology perspective i'm not sure this is the correct use.

If folks are coming up with a universal scale can we please not use it?   thumbsup.gif



Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: Tang Lung in Rome on January 08, 2020, 01:20:45 AM
"Although it is time consuming, why not just describe a poster's flaws in as much detail as possible vs. a blanket grade?"

This
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: MoviePosterBid.com on January 10, 2020, 09:11:00 PM
"Although it is time consuming, why not just describe a poster's flaws in as much detail as possible vs. a blanket grade?"

This

it isn't humanly possible to do this when you sell 500 items a week, or 3000 every other week.
Unless you hire more people that is, but then, you have to raise buyer premium, or something else in order to justify the extra costs involved with more employees
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: crowzilla on January 10, 2020, 10:24:23 PM
it isn't humanly possible to do this when you sell 500 items a week, or 3000 every other week.
Unless you hire more people that is, but then, you have to raise buyer premium, or something else in order to justify the extra costs involved with more employees

Or you could just sell 60% of all your items at a loss, and run your business as a goodwill gesture for collectors and not worry about making money.
Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: MoviePosterBid.com on January 11, 2020, 01:50:13 AM
THIS IS IT!!!  Post 1980 posters should be mint.  Period.

Why did you even bother to buy a 6, Ben?  Makes no sense to me.  I know you wanted it, but a 6 should always be a no go.  ESPECIALLY post 1980.

I couldn't agree with this more. Willing to buy lower graded stuff? Suck it up.

Or you could just sell 60% of all your items at a loss, and run your business as a goodwill gesture for collectors and not worry about making money.

Oh yeah... This is everyone's dealer dream you know. There is nothing like spending $500 working for 4 days getting stuff described for buyers who only want to bid five bucks and have you sell your investment for $250.

Then there is the other side of the coin in this business: when a dealer doesn't describe something correctly (in your opinion, or reality) and rather than take the time to return it for a full refund, which you can with absolutely no problem, the customer doesn't bother just so they can bitch about it for 3 full years and then stand on a soapbox stating "I'll never buy anything from them again" when you probably haven't bought anything from them in the ensuing 3 years anyway. That's like someone who doesn't shop at Wal Mart saying they are going to boycott Wal Mart, or Chic-Fil-A, or whatever other place they never go to.

Personally, if I was going to be bitching about someone forever, I would have at least gotten my refund, so it didn't cost me $131 to bitch.
a smart person would at least have gotten his money back.



Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: wonka on January 11, 2020, 11:04:26 AM
Lol Rich, as usual you never disappoint...your constant ability to either steer topics or discussions random/odd ways, all the while making it about you to an extent, is really exceptional.

I started this thread about HA grading re: a recent experience I had, so I can bitch all I want to...we all can, its the point of a forum, which you already know..we have had the displeasure of reading your endless whining diatribes over the years across multiple forums. Its amazing there are still people dripping in as new members from time to time, or that you haven't completely chased everyone away from internet poster discussion in general.  Your arrogant, obnoxious, and demeaning persona online has had to have driven away a substantial number of folks from the hobby in general or at least being vocal about it in places like this one.
Also, feel free to start a poster dealer/solidarity/'Woe is Me' thread at some point...I'll chime in!

The poster itself isn't the issue. The money isn't an issue. I don't want to return it. I will keep looking for another one.
If I returned it I still would have posted this thread, because after all, the point you (as usual) miss is:

The state of Ben's Indy is ridiculous vs. what the vacuum tabled, colour-boosted picture attempted to convey

A smart person would at least have gotten that point out of all this talk.

Also, comparing a poster auction house like HA for a niche hobby like unnecessary/frivolous movie posters to a huge box store chain like Wal Mart where people purchase necessities is an amazing leap, even for you. 

Title: Re: Heritage condition descriptions: Bringing the LOLs since 1976
Post by: iojabba on January 13, 2020, 04:15:12 PM
I couldn't agree with this more. Willing to buy lower graded stuff? Suck it up.


So you only sell "Mint" post-1980 posters?

If not, why do you sell them?