|
|
Post by fuzzyduck121 on Jul 20, 2011 21:26:51 GMT 1
Not sure if this has been discussed before but after taking some snaps of my colour trolleys tonight (bought direct from POW) the closeup of the signature clearly shows an underprinted outline for someone to trace in pencil.....anyone shed any light?  |
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 20, 2011 21:34:43 GMT 1
Maybe thats on the unsigned ones and they couldnt be arsed to do another run without it.
|
|
|
|
Post by fingerz on Jul 20, 2011 21:35:57 GMT 1
i think he was just learning write around that time ....  |
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 20, 2011 22:27:48 GMT 1
It's so anyone can get the sig right.
|
|
|
|
Post by skitchy on Jul 20, 2011 22:57:11 GMT 1
wow strange....I have heard many conspiracies about Banksy sig change. but this kind of confirms a few of them... very strange!
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 20, 2011 23:04:44 GMT 1
wow strange....I have heard many conspiracies about Banksy sig change. but this kind of confirms a few of them... very strange! The whole edition is like that... Question is - Does it really matter if he signed them or not.........? |
|
|
|
Post by gibbin82 on Jul 20, 2011 23:15:12 GMT 1
wow strange....I have heard many conspiracies about Banksy sig change. but this kind of confirms a few of them... very strange! The whole edition is like that... Question is - Does it really matter if he signed them or not.........? As far as adding to the image I would say it wouldn't matter in the slightest, but for desirability, value and to think he actually handled them (which could now be in doubt) it makes a big difference |
|
|
|
Post by chaserawr on Jul 20, 2011 23:36:08 GMT 1
Makes me wonder sometimes what the hell "Banksy" really is, an artist, a collective, a corporation? what the hell!
|
|
|
|
Post by jeezuzjonessnr on Jul 21, 2011 3:13:46 GMT 1
Makes me wonder sometimes what the hell "Banksy" really is, an artist, a collective, a corporation? what the hell! all of the above ask POW for explanation? |
|
|
|
Post by megaelch on Jul 21, 2011 9:36:20 GMT 1
When my coloured trolley arrived from POW it did not have a signature at all but showed the white signature outline like on your pic ... i probably still have the picture at home and will try to find it . I had to return to POW and did receive a signed one a few weeks later. So yes the whole edition has the pre-printed signature outline on it !
|
|
FUSShop
Gallery 
www.FUSShop.co.uk
Posts: 275
|
Post by FUSShop on Jul 21, 2011 9:38:04 GMT 1
To me it looks like he signed it in White to begin with, then decided it wasn't clear enough, so he's been back through and done it in Pencil.
|
|
|
|
Post by balibob on Jul 21, 2011 9:39:06 GMT 1
I suppose it makes sure that the signature is the same on all the prints, I know my signature varies a little bit (looks wise) from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by megaelch on Jul 21, 2011 9:41:50 GMT 1
no definately not signed in white .. there is just a white empty signature space on the print ... just take a rubber and check ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey1181 on Jul 21, 2011 9:56:43 GMT 1
maybe it was going to be an entirely unsigned run with just the white outline, then they decided to sign a bunch?
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 21, 2011 10:13:13 GMT 1
agree shakey ................but you have to remember P O W are not the most professional outfit , maybe its any easy sig now so anyone can sign them on banksys behalf while he is out colouring walls
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey1181 on Jul 21, 2011 10:32:26 GMT 1
doesn't flags have a similar sig? i.e a printed signature?
|
|
|
|
Post by joevalentino on Jul 21, 2011 10:56:28 GMT 1
yes they (gold and silver) do
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Jul 21, 2011 11:05:00 GMT 1
I think it's part of printing process,which i guess helps keep them all uniform.At least that's what common sense might suggest
I've had damaged prints in the past where POW were very helpful in replacing, but i did have to wait some time for them to be signed
|
|
|
|
Post by twist65 on Jul 21, 2011 11:12:45 GMT 1
i thought people at POW had been caught out signing them in the past, didn't some lass get fired for it??
|
|
|
|
Post by skitchy on Jul 21, 2011 12:22:38 GMT 1
Can anyone remember at what point the sig changed?
I can see this having an affect on value in years to come. ie some of Warhols prints were only initialed AW
|
|
|
|
Post by joevalentino on Jul 21, 2011 12:29:38 GMT 1
Can anyone remember at what point the sig changed? I can see this having an affect on value in years to come. ie some of Warhols prints were only initialed AW after he split from Laz |
|
|
|
Post by bonesy on Jul 21, 2011 13:13:44 GMT 1
A whole other old can of worms..... but I hate this prcatice. A limited numbered run should be a closed run. Replaements of the same number should not be issued, even if damaged in transit. The integrity of the print run should be #1 most important IMO.
There was even a story on here years ago where it was reported POW replaced a damaged print (with the same number) like a year after the fact when a print had been damaged during the framing process. I think the post was quickly deleted.
|
|
|
|
Post by skitchy on Jul 21, 2011 13:17:20 GMT 1
Can anyone remember at what point the sig changed? I can see this having an affect on value in years to come. ie some of Warhols prints were only initialed AW after he split from Laz What was the first print to have the new sig? |
|
|
|
Post by twist65 on Jul 21, 2011 13:23:40 GMT 1
agree with bonesy there - an edition should be the edition, thats it. If a print gets damaged in transit then it should be replaced with a AP or PP or something at the gallery/artists discretion, if the owner damages it getting it framed or something then it should be tough luck!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by tobaum on Jul 21, 2011 13:40:02 GMT 1
Imo a damaged print should ne be replaced at all.
Take care of your prints people!
And when it comes to damages during framing process it is weerder as framers have insurance so it means you receive money from the insurance corresponding to the value of the print and a new print from Pow? sweet
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Jul 21, 2011 14:18:12 GMT 1
This was damaged during postal process people  Should buyers be held responsible for the actions of others? I've also seen damaged prints replaced and the damaged one destroyed with my own mince pies, for me that instills faith and integrity of the edition, hell even perhaps the print house/gallery If you think of an edition of say 299, that only 299 are printed then you are sadly mistaken and maybe even naive.It's possible to print extra AND keep the integrity of the edition, extra being printed for this exact purpose I know of many forum artists who have left overs or actually returned damaged prints who then mark them as a/p or p/p and sell the damaged print at an increased price, now that's a bit naughty I can just see people buying a print from POW which is damaged during the postal process saying oh well never mind..yeah right... |
|
|
|
Post by bonesy on Jul 21, 2011 14:33:29 GMT 1
This was a big topic a few years back and I know I fall into the minority but I dont even think 265/ 500 should be replaced by 265/ 500 even if damaged in intial transit.
POW should replace with APs (up to 10% of the run) or with seperate numbers set aside for this purpose. I realize this would cut into profit margins as less prints would be sold to the public & customers may not be happy but the integrity of the print run would be tight. The nature of a limited edition item dictates the number of mint pieces out there should diminish as time goes on.
Back when Grannies was released I went through the checkout process, received my confirmation email, but I was never charged and never received a print as the POW checkout system sold the same print twice. I was pissed but s**t hapens. I didnt expect POW to produce a new Grey edition for me like has happened with the past 2 releases due to POW giving into whiners (who mostly just want to make a buck).
Same scenario here, I know the excitement and adrenaline rush all too well when buying a print but dont own the mint print until its in my hand. If a print is damaged in transit hopefully POW has a replacement but a new #265 shouldnt be produced. This would also cuase POW to package much more carefully, which they have gotten better at.
|
|
|
|
Post by elwheel on Jul 21, 2011 14:36:38 GMT 1
I think the signature 'rack' can really only have a couple of explainations.
1) Banksys signature is so contrived that even he needs guidance to keep a uniform signature and retain a consistency in terms of scale and placement of signature
or
2) People other than Banksy can 'sign' his prints
If it is 2) then thats pretty fricking sad. How busy can you be to not have time to sign your editions once or twice a year?
|
|
Daniel Silk
Founder 
URBAN ART ASSOCIATION
Posts: 21,613
Location: UK
|
Post by Daniel Silk on Jul 21, 2011 14:44:32 GMT 1
Not sure if this has been discussed before but after taking some snaps of my colour trolleys tonight (bought direct from POW) the closeup of the signature clearly shows an underprinted outline for someone to trace in pencil.....anyone shed any light? Does look very strange  |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Read on Jul 21, 2011 14:45:56 GMT 1
maybe it was going to be an entirely unsigned run with just the white outline, then they decided to sign a bunch? I hope this is the case rather than its so anyone can sign his prints. |
|
