Movie Posters Discussion Thread

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by d0ntacos

problem is the type of frame he's using doesn't offer the 2 hook option.
And the only reason I used those pictures cause he said that my other photo was low quality.. So I had to use a bigger picture.. Lol

Should work with any frame, I basically put two of them in the wall (evenly) side by side with a little bit of space in between and then hang the wire cord on the back of the frame from them, but that is if you have the metal cord with the frame, all of my stuff is professionally framed, not sure if the pre-made frames in stores feature that.

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by victim

I like to rearrange my posters. Sometimes in different areas. Sounds like a lot of wall patching.

You simply need to add more posters so you don't need to worry about rearranging them, you can just change out the posters but put the frame back up in the original spot.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

Should work with any frame, I basically put two of them in the wall (evenly) side by side with a little bit of space in between and then hang the wire cord on the back of the frame from them, but that is if you have the metal cord with the frame, all of my stuff is professionally framed, not sure if the pre-made frames in stores feature that.

the frame he got doesn't offer the metal cord. Just a basic lil rigid metal piece that looks like teeth so the hook can catch on.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

You simply need to add more posters so you don't need to worry about rearranging them, you can just change out the posters but put the frame back up in the original spot.

that's what I'm doing lol. My walls are almost fully covered lol.

[ssjmichael]

Nakatomi listed some older Tim Doyle prints. They only have a few of each

Clerks

[Show spoiler]

Fanboys Variant (which I own and love)

[Show spoiler]

Fanboys Regular

[Show spoiler]

[househead]

Originally Posted by d0ntacos

And the only reason I used those pictures cause he said that my other photo was low quality.. So I had to use a bigger picture.. Lol

Wait, so you weren't saying to use railroad ties?


Who's going for those Mondo Oscar night posters?

[roar]

Originally Posted by househead

Wait, so you weren't saying to use railroad ties?


Who's going for those Mondo Oscar night posters?

Other than Hugo and Rango I haven't heard of any other titles. Those two don't interest me a whole lot so at this time I'd say I'm out.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by househead

Wait, so you weren't saying to use railroad ties?


Who's going for those Mondo Oscar night posters?

this is what he has in back of his frame..

[IMG][/IMG]

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by victim

This will have to do for now.

how did you mount it?

[househead]

Hey victim I have a bunch of frames like that and I'm not using them. Come on down and get 'em if you want them. I believe they are trendsetters from Michaels.

[Kinsella5]

The holy grail of Mondo prints, Tyler Stout's "The Thing" has popped up on eBay. These are at the top of many collector's "want" list including mine, and they don't appear often, but here is an example of what NOT to do...that is trim your print which this seller has stated was done. This devalues the print greatly, why they trimmed it is beyond me. I have a hard time believing a professional framer would have done this, but then again if you don't inform a framer that an item is a collectible and not to trim it, they may assume it is ok. Because the print was technically slightly bigger than 24x36 inches, clearly it was trimmed down to save the owner money by fitting in a 24x36 frame rather than having it done custom.

With that being said, if this guy gets an opening bid, it is because someone either doesn't care or doesn't read the item description, as brief as it is, in my opinion, the guy should start it off at $1000 and he may get a bid. If it wasn't trimmed, he'd probably get a $2500 bid fairly quickly....so case in point, never trim your prints/posters if you want to retain its value.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Thing-reg-sc...item256d3ecf09

[roar]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

The holy grail of Mondo prints, Tyler Stout's "The Thing" has popped up on eBay. These are at the top of many collector's "want" list including mine, and they don't appear often, but here is an example of what NOT to do...that is trim your print which this seller has stated was done. This devalues the print greatly, why they trimmed it is beyond me. I have a hard time believing a professional framer would have done this, but then again if you don't inform a framer that an item is a collectible and not to trim it, they may assume it is ok. Because the print was technically slightly bigger than 24x36 inches, clearly it was trimmed down to save the owner money by fitting in a 24x36 frame rather than having it done custom.

With that being said, if this guy gets an opening bid, it is because someone either doesn't care or doesn't read the item description, as brief as it is, in my opinion, the guy should start it off at $1000 and he may get a bid. If it wasn't trimmed, he'd probably get a $2500 bid fairly quickly....so case in point, never trim your prints/posters if you want to retain its value.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Thing-reg-sc...item256d3ecf09

I don't think the seller is terribly interested in selling it... if someone has truly hit hard times that poster would have been listed with no reserve and an opening bid of 0.01.

We will see where it goes, but without better pictures a buyer is taking quite a leap of faith making the purchase on the two that are up there. If I was selling a $2,500 print I'd I've loads more pictures up. I'm also not much of a fan of keyword dropping in the title... really the print stands on its own without putting 'moss' in the title.

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by roar

I don't think the seller is terribly interested in selling it... if someone has truly hit hard times that poster would have been listed with no reserve and an opening bid of 0.01.

We will see where it goes, but without better pictures a buyer is taking quite a leap of faith making the purchase on the two that are up there. If I was selling a $2,500 print I'd I've loads more pictures up. I'm also not much of a fan of keyword dropping in the title... really the print stands on its own without putting 'moss' in the title.

True, but in it's present condition, attempting to get $2500 minimum is rather high. More pictures I agree are needed, but ultimately what will hurt is the trimming of it. I agree with the keyword dropping too, but I am sure some people report auctions like that since all you have to do is click "Report Item" and then select listing practices and keyword spamming. eBay can remove it just because of that and the seller then would need to revise it. But dropping Moss's name in it is not needed.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

True, but in it's present condition, attempting to get $2500 minimum is rather high. More pictures I agree are needed, but ultimately what will hurt is the trimming of it. I agree with the keyword dropping too, but I am sure some people report auctions like that since all you have to do is click "Report Item" and then select listing practices and keyword spamming. eBay can remove it just because of that and the seller then would need to revise it. But dropping Moss's name in it is not needed.

Wasn't it 24x36? What was the original size of the print? The price is way too high.. He should of started the bid low about $1000.00 Considering that the print has been tampered with.

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by d0ntacos

Wasn't it 24x36? What was the original size of the print? The price is way too high.. He should of started the bid low about $1000.00 Considering that the print has been tampered with.

Yes technically it is listed as 24x36 but when it was printed it was slightly larger based on what I have read. This happens with theatrical movie posters too, they aren't always spot on 27x40, for example The Dark Knight advance style "B" (Why So Serious?) style originals are 27x 40 1/16th of an inch.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

Yes technically it is listed as 24x36 but when it was printed it was slightly larger based on what I have read. This happens with theatrical movie posters too, they aren't always spot on 27x40, for example The Dark Knight advance style "B" (Why So Serious?) style originals are 27x 40 1/16th of an inch.

the mondo print of beyond is listed as 37.5 x 19.5 and when I measured it. Its 18x36. How did that happen??

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by d0ntacos

the mondo print of beyond is listed as 37.5 x 19.5 and when I measured it. Its 18x36. How did that happen??

Not sure what print that is, did you buy it from Mondo directly? Where did you buy it?

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

Not sure what print that is, did you buy it from Mondo directly? Where did you buy it?

yep bought it off mondo directly. was listed as 19.5 x 37.5 Ken Taylor - Beyond

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by d0ntacos

yep bought it off mondo directly. was listed as 19.5 x 37.5 Ken Taylor - Beyond

Quite possible they goofed when they listed the measurements online or they listed them originally but then when it came time to print, they felt it would be easier to have them printed 18x36. You may want to email Mondo about it and ask them, I am sure if anyone has the right answer, it would be them.

[d0ntacos]

Originally Posted by Kinsella5

Quite possible they goofed when they listed the measurements online or they listed them originally but then when it came time to print, they felt it would be easier to have them printed 18x36. You may want to email Mondo about it and ask them, I am sure if anyone has the right answer, it would be them.

ya probably. It kind of works out for me.. Less cost on the custom framing lol. 19.5 x37.5 was gonna cost me like 300.00 which is retarded pricing.