Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ru007 on August 18, 2019 at 2:12am

That wouldn’t bother me at all, I personally don’t think it ads or deducts  much value 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by rob kunne on August 18, 2019 at 2:47am

for me it feels the same as a fake autograph because it's not Original...think about a scarface signed poster or photo with mirror image with high value than i think it feels not good. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 18, 2019 at 7:09am

It would bother me. This is one reason I try to collect only official copyrighted movie stills, not knockoff photos. This is not foolproof - some movie still are backwards. I avoid those.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ru007 on August 18, 2019 at 10:32am

You have a very nice signed authentic Christopher Lloyd  photo, but if your not happy with it sale it and move on, I see nothing wrong with this photo at all in fact some of us collectors would be more then happy to own this really cool piece. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on August 18, 2019 at 7:14am

99% of the people admiring your display will not even notice including myself. With that said, you are the one who needs to be pleased. If it bugs you; change it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by rob kunne on August 18, 2019 at 8:57am

i can't change it because it is what it is and throw the photo away is not a option.maybe it's a warning to other collectors that you not only have to look at the autograph but that the photo is important as wel... and you are right that 99% of the people don't see it at first but mostly find out later. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by B. Anderson on August 18, 2019 at 10:22am

I think it is insane to be bothered by this, much less to equate it to a fake autograph. It looks amazing. Did you ever stop to think maybe it was printed that way because it looks better that way?

It would not bother me in the least.

I think there is charm in collecting original studio photographs, but I think that is more so for much older films. Personally I obtain many autographs from a small number of actors, and I sometimes use originals and sometimes ones I get professionally printed that are high quality, and those that I do get printed, I do sometimes modify to improve. And the subject in the photos has admired some of what I have done. So I really would not let it bother you in the slightest.

Honestly a photo has little value on its own unless very old or rare studio originals, and then the value starts coming into play more.

I have paid in the hundreds for original photos before, but I also would have been happy to get cheaper, high quality prints.

The only thing that detracts from your photo is the PSA sticker. It is nice to have some sense of authenticity and assurance, but it does detract from it of course.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on August 18, 2019 at 12:13pm

Hi,

I don't think it is "insane" at all. I look for just such things. I''d call is preference. While I do collect vintage original stills only, IMO opinion many people simply look different backwards, not to mention the buttons and so on. Expressions change. Some folks smile more on one side (Gleason), others arch an eyebrow (Spock). To many fans, this will be noticeable. Bowie with his eyes...Gloria Swanson's iconic mole...the part in someone's hair... Others will not care about this. It is personal criterion, like copy photos themselves - I find them over-contrasted and fuzzy, sometimes color twisted or cropped too tightly.

Agreed about that PSA sticker! Maybe is stands for "Public Service Announcement" - it's big enough... :(

• ▶ Reply