printer's proof - what's the point?

[holiday]

Bruce has up a few of these, and Mr. Jaws has two of the Star Wars printer's proofs up over $400 already.  I don't get it.  Can someone edumacate me.

[kauaitx]

Oooohhhhh.... the coveted printer's proofs!   I still remember the big scuttle to get a set of rolled (of course, since they're printer's proofs) undated Revenge of the Jedi posters.    They're simply the posters with the color bars on the side for the printers to check for correctness.  They're the posters that precede the final printing that get sent out to cinemas.  They're pre-cut and and so are larger than the usual 27x41.  They are supposed to be destroyed, but, as you can see, some get whisked away.

In terms of collectibility, they can command the same prices as the rare posters themselves.  For some, they hold the same, if not more, value and rarity since they precede the final product.  

I'd go for a printer's proof of a Star Wars poster any day.



Jeannie

[kauaitx]

Is Mr. Jaws on eBay, Holiday?  Could you provide a link, please?  I know this would be outing the auction, but, ah well, I'd really like to see what the printer's proofs are for.   I tried searching for Mr. Jaws on eBay, but I can't find him.



Jeannie

[holiday]

Mr. Jaws is my friendly moniker for the bidder JAWS1975 in Bruce's auctions.  He bids on a lot of stuff, and tends to bid high on stuff he really likes.  If you go to Bruce's site, you'll see he has the bids right now for the headlining Star Wars printer's proofs.

Now, back to the "why".  Is it simply the desire to have the earliest possible form of a poster that drives the printer's proof logic?  I guess I don't get the lust to buy something simply because it's more scarce, and not because you intrinsically like the item.  In other words, you can't tell me those color bars on the left side rev your engine from an aesthetic point of view, of course.

[kauaitx]

That's exactly it -- the scarcity of it.  From a collecting point of view, if what you desire is rarity, then printer's proofs would be it, because they are more scarce than the final product.  But, not all printer's proofs are created equal. 

From an aesthetics point of view, you're right, it's not more pleasing, because you've got this long multi-colored bar running the length of one side of the poster that throws off the entire image.  And, good luck trying to find a poster frame to fit that unless you go for the oversized frames.

It's simply a matter of wanting the rarest poster and for some collectors, that's the objective.

I'm going to go check these SW proofs out.....


Jeannie

[kauaitx]

Hhmmm....

[Ari]

Id suggest, that while there are/were printers proofs,  usually these are UNTRIMMED posters, so many turn up, and believe me printers dont need many proofs. going on a limb, call me out, whatever, but I dont think they are.

(havent even looked at this auction)

Ive designed many posters, catalogues adverts etc for the company I work for, we get A proof, sign it, OK, or not, thats it, why print 50? or even 20? its either right or not.

So, I say UNTRIMMED 1 SHEET

Kill me

[kauaitx]

Well, I'm with you on this one, Ari.  I was thinking the same thing once I looked at the posters -- that these perhaps aren't printer's proofs but untrimmed 1-sheets.  


Jeannie

[Ari]

Just common sense really, in fact Ive seen printers proofs, with holes punched, and hung on racks, signed off, when I went for a job in a Sydney Distro co, I didnt get the job, I was "over qualified" nearly cried when I saw a wharehouse of posters and 35mm reels gathering dust.

[kauaitx]

To be more accurate, they would be "proofsheets", which are the uncut (avoiding the use of the word "untrimmed" * here) sheets from which the final poster is cut.


* I've gotten confused in the past when the word "untrimmed" was used because it made me think of posters that were trimmed down to size or trimmed at the bottom so that the printing information is eliminated. 



Jeannie

[Bruce]

Call these what you will, but these came straight from a man who worked for the printer in 1977. They often ran bunches of each test poster, both because the expense was in creating the separations (and once the press was ready, paper cost was negligible), and also because there often were many people who wanted to see proofs, and the worst thing was to run out of them and need more.

I certainly wonder why anyone would save regular one-sheets and not trim them. But whatever reason these were saved, the best part about these posters is that they are surely real and from 1977, and the same can't be known for certain about lots of other Star Wars posters, especially the no rating style C's.

If the extra 1" bothers you, you can always neatly trim it off!

And certainly those of you who hate these should not bid on them, but since you never bid in our auctions anyway, that won't create a hardship.

Bruce

[Ari]

Dont think anyone hates them, but I think the terminology is wrong, and I may be wrong, but Bruce you know the printing industry and you know, even though it costs the same to print 1 or 100, for a proof they dont print 100. I dont think they are worth less, just think the terminoligy should be changed. End of the day I really dont care cos I aint gonna buy one anyway, because I focus on a different area.

[kauaitx]

The realness of these uncut posters was never the issue, nor was "hating these" uncut posters a consideration.  How are you coming up with these thoughts, Bruce?

We are discussing whether these are printer's proofs or uncut 1-sheets, and being one or the other doesn't diminish the poster's value.  And indeed, the presence of the color bars reinforce the genuineness of the posters.  However, to make note, the Star Wars Style C with PG rating was not bootlegged, so that's a moot point when talking about real vs. fake with this poster. 

But, I don't think you can say with certainty that the posters up for auction are printer's proofs.  You're right, why would uncut 1-sheets be saved without being trimmed?  But, by the same token, why would printer's proofs, especially ones without any markings or notice of approval from the film company, be saved as well?  What is more likely to be floating out there in greater numbers?  Several uncut 1-sheets or several printer's proofs?  If this is a printer's proof, then so far this would be the third printer's proofs of the Style C that I've seen offered up for sale.  When these uncut posters are put up for auction, they are almost invariably touted as being printer's proofs rather than proofsheets or uncut 1-sheets.  I only recall once before where an uncut poster was simply described as uncut rather than promoted as a printer's proof.

Again, I have to ask the question:  What are we more likely to encounter?  An uncut 1-sheet or a printer's proof? 

These posters are certainly uncut and real, though.  That's how I would be looking at them.



Jeannie

[MoviePosterBid.com]

Folks.. I'm not sure that regular one-sheets would be printed with the color bars for more than a few reasons, the main one being of course that posters of this nature are not printed from large rolls as a newspaper would (did you ever see those 10-foot high rolls?? they weigh 1000s of pounds), these would be printed from a flat pallet of glossy paper. These sheets come in various sizes and the larger the sheet, the more they cost. Even that 1" extra costs extra money.

second, if they were to be trimmed after printing, they would have extra meat on all fours sides
third, the color bars chew up extra ink

If Bruce knows the printing guy, he should ask how they worked in that shop.

also, these can be called proof sets, proofs, printer's proofs, proofsheets etc.. it all means the same thing to a printer.

Now whether they would print so many copies is up to each printer's needs and or requests.
the cost of printing is less the paper & ink than it is the color separations (back in 1977 more expensive than today) and setting up the print job on the machine. Once that work is done, if they run off 10 or 200 doesn't make much difference (as long as they're being paid for the job).
Some machinery can't be shut down that fast and if you've ever seen how fast these machines run, they could pop out 200 posters (on a large offset) in about 3-5 minutes.  The first few copies or a little more would'nt be colored properly because the ink needs to work through the press properly to give even saturation & coverage and once you run the press down it doesn't stop right away, it has to cycle before it can come to a full stop and that's alot like watching an old steam engine.. thumpa-thumpa-thumpa-thumpa-thumpa-thumpa--thumpa---thumpa----thumpa-----thum-pa--------thu

I do not believe these are untrimed posters.. I believe they are proofs. The fact that there are more of them printed than there are of Soldier Blue is because it was a major production (regardless of whether Fox thought it was bomb).

Now why anyone would want to pay so much for proofs is a question only the Star Wars Geek Queen and other Star Wars Freakazoids can answer.........

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

But whatever reason these were saved, the best part about these posters is that they are surely real and from 1977, and the same can't be known for certain about lots of other Star Wars posters, especially the no rating style C's.

Bruce

Bruce, Jeff Rosen - the NS4 Star Wars guru - told me a while back most of the Star Wars C print run was destroyed and there are only about 1000 left, including 100 "PG" versions.  So the printer's proof of the Star Wars C is the rarest of the rare.  Also I think SW fans, including moi, especially like it because it is "action-packed" - it made the cover of the Star Wars Poster Book (out of the 500+ Star Wars posters the authors could have chosen....)

[kovacs01]

Printers proof, uncircumcised one sheet, or whatever you want to call it, it has to be all about scarcity and the lack of authenticity questions.  some people buy items simply because they are rare.

[Bruce]

I have printed over half a million books, and over 200,000 comic books. Three times over the years the printer made a coloring error on my job, and they agreed to destroy the entire print run each time (over coloring!) and re-do it right, and they did (absorbing all the expense, because it was their error each time). That is one reason they are happy to run lots of proofs, to make 100% certain the job is done right (and that everyone involved has signed off on it), so that they won't have to reprint.

In movie posters, there are lots of people who have an interest in the job that few others would care about. A minor actor might have been promised a certain billing, or the music credit might be contractually agreed to be done a certain way, and it may seem like no big deal to YOU, but it is to the people involved, and if a mistake is made that means scrapping the print run and starting over.

That brings up another point. In the three cases I mention above, I trust the printers involved DID do as they say, because I was dealing with really good people, but there are tons of sleazy printers out there. If you don't know it, many of the movie posters that end up in dealers' hands were "over-runs" from the printer that they do without studio permission. That is one reason Fox and others go crazy over auctions for their posters, because they never got any money for them in the first place.

Also, in my case, one of the three times I asked them to destroy them all, and I believe they did. One time I asked them to sell me the "bad ones" at a cheap price, and I sent them to stores as free samples. In the third case I asked them to give me 25 copies with the "wrong" color, and they did, but for the life of me I have no idea where they are (it was the very first EC reprint I did in 1972, and they no doubt would now be rare million dollar comics!).

Maybe they never did destroy them, and someday after I am gone someone will surface with rare Bruce Hershenson "printer proofs" of my books!

Bruce

[joneyyy]

does anyone know why jaws keeps buying the same posters.... he must have at least 100 jaws 1 sheets.

[CSM]

does anyone know why jaws keeps buying the same posters.... he must have at least 100 jaws 1 sheets.

A case of rampant fetishism...

[supraman079]

does anyone know why jaws keeps buying the same posters.... he must have at least 100 jaws 1 sheets.

He wants to own the market and dictate his price on them one day?

[Harry Caul]

That is what I was thinking... Jaws wants to become the De Beers of movie posters!

[kauaitx]

uncircumcised one sheet

LOL!

Thanks, Schan, you just gave me my new favorite poster term!




Jeannie

[eatbrie]

Ahh, Mr. Jaws, the dreaded Mr. Jaws... the greatest mystery in movie poster collecting since Prof. Powers.

I'm not getting this guy (assuming he is a guy).  He overpays on many items, doesn't seem to care about condition as long at it is BTTF, Indy or Jaws (shit, he could be me  ))   AND, he bids early.

A mystery indeed.

Come on, Bruce, spill the beans!

T

[CSM]

Must be Spielberg...

[eatbrie]

Actually, Spielberg (or one of his three executive assistants) buy a lot of posters on Ebay.  He gives them to friends, and has no other ways to get them.  I was part of one of these transactions a long time ago.

T