Yuku free message boards

Following that post I had a quick compare of the Profiles in History image against Todd Feiertag's from the ebay listing.
Using Photoshop, in layers in the same file, reducing the opacity conforming the size and matching up perspective.
Feiertag image admittedly isn't ideal resolution, but if the Profiles image had roughly matched up I'd have left it at that.
It didn't.
So I scanned the Borst 1 sht from Graven Images, along with Feiertag's, another known original.
The three 1 shts. (I've brightened Borst's for better clairity of detail.)









Though I couldn't match Feiertag's to The Profiles 1 sht, it easily matched up the Borst's copy.



Borst's being sharper, I used that for reference against the Profiles copy.
(Any discrepancies I also checked the Feiertag copy.)



Couldn't get it to match.
The largest discrepancy seeming to be the panel of credits beneath the image.
Panel taller in the Profiles copy.
Other detailed, but marked differences first.
The MM in LAEMMLE, top left.


(Edit: Only just spotted I captioned the pic incorrectly it's Profiles top, Borst bottom, everything stands.)
Different type face, although it could possibly be an area of restoration.

The title "DRACULA"



The letter spacing is different.



Borst "DRACULA" type versus Profiles.
Though the initial D and final A match, things in between differ.
DR, roughly similar.
Borst RA very tight spacing. Profiles noticeably more open.
Likewise Borst AC tight. Profiles AC more open.
CU, roughly similar.
UL, Borst this time open. Profiles tighter. (Used up more space than with previous letters.)
LA, roughly similar.
Where the letters are at variance they sit slightly differently on the red cobweb.
(This of course be down to a large area of restoration.)

At the base, generally it looks like the type is well matched, but the line spacing is off.
More space between the lines in the Profiles copy making the panel deeper.
This a pretty good instance of the spacing between the lines.

Top line matched



Bottom line matched.



"With" is spaced the same to the line above, but there's more space between it and the line below compared to the Borst copy.

Also, there was speculation on MOPO that if the Profiles copy is a fake, the cover image of the 1 sht from the pressbook may have been used.

The pressbook cover actually isn't an perfectly accurate image of the I sht, not proportionally as tall as a 1 sht for one thing.

Could possibly have made use of the image, but the Lugosi image is cropped more at the bottom beneath bow tie so some image would have to be made up.

But if they did, they were sharp enough to re-render all the type.

Not saying the Profiles copy is a fake, with re-rendered type, just that it's a little odd.
Though could possibly be all down to much restoration, and if so presumably not the copy Studio C had, as it doesn't seem to tally with the description.

"John Davis states at the top of his COA that the writing in the margin was added in pencil by hand and not checked for accuracy. I would assume when this poster was linen backed the 'fine print' was added to the bottom from a different Dracula poster. we are adding the COA on line with the poster description today to our site www.profilesinhistory.com and www.icollector.com. This poster is 100% original and anyone with questions should feel free to call me or John Davis directly" Joe Maddalena

Up until seeing that "masterprint" I was willing to consider that the anomalies, the MM, the typesetting of DRACULA (the one I thought the oddest) and the different line spacing on the bottom could be due to restoration inaccuracies. Though that doesn't tally with condition rating, or the example that passed through studio c. For the anomalies to coincide perfectly (absolutely perfectly) with the "masterprint" means only one thing to me. I have no where near the experience of Poster Mountain in handling old paper, but I'm willing to stake my inconsiderable reputation that it is 100% bogus bullshit, amateur bogus bullshit at that. There's also a limited edition of that "masterprint" at that site, far closer to original dimensions, I'll stock link up when I'm back home.

I think we can safely assume, that since the art for the Masterprint varies from both known genuine 1 shts then, it most likely isn't exactly reproduced from any genuine studio material.
Most likely I think, poor quality image of an original, drawn over, type reset in parts, then repro from that.
Whether this company did that work, or are reproducing from an earlier repro, dunno.
Their other stuff doesn't look as re-jigged at a cursory glance.
The ltd edition print, with more accurate dimensions:


Others:













This whole Universal fakes thing is rather demoralizing.
I'd say there's some pretty sharp people at NSFGE.
And the work Dan did on the minty whites was bang on and detailed.
So, what I can't quite understand, is how the fakes, (including or excluding this one), got past people with more experience, who have handled so much old paper including Universal paper.
Bad eyesight? Developed no instinct over the years? Difficult to comprehend.
There should be more news on this one soon, the surprise third copy, when only two were known to exist.
(And sold through the auction house already stung by earlier fakes.)

This whole malarkey is knocking the value of original paper a bit for me.
What's the point?
Always been against having repros, but well, you buy that Murders in the Rue Morgue, (without any nefarious intentions), and what's the difference?
You have something on your wall that potentially could fox even the most expert authenticators.
Print the legend.