ART DAY - Movie Poster original paintings! 1 1

[delekkerste]

Curious to hear what the underwater painting went for, Gene?

 

Well, that's another thing - there's no public record of it and the auction house won't disclose the information even after the fact. One person told me $40Ks and another told me low $60Ks (maybe one # was before BP and one after BP?) but have yet to hear a definitive number from anyone.

 

At Heritage or Christie's (the latter sold a McGinnis concept painting from Diamonds are Forever for 6-figures a few years ago - definitely not as good nor nearly as well-known as either McCarthy Thunderball image), I have no doubt that prices would have been much higher. Regardless of what the actual figure was, it reflected a big "under the radar" discount to FMV.

[Terry Doyle]

Thanks.

[Terry Doyle]

Curious to hear what the underwater painting went for, Gene?

 

Well, that's another thing - there's no public record of it and the auction house won't disclose the information even after the fact. One person told me $40Ks and another told me low $60Ks (maybe one # was before BP and one after BP?) but have yet to hear a definitive number from anyone.

 

At Heritage or Christie's (the latter sold a McGinnis concept painting from Diamonds are Forever for 6-figures a few years ago - definitely not as good nor nearly as well-known as either McCarthy Thunderball image), I have no doubt that prices would have been much higher. Regardless of what the actual figure was, it reflected a big "under the radar" discount to FMV.

 

Robert McGinnis "Diamonds Are Forever" prototype artwork (1971) sold for £79,500.

 

You'd have to do a £ to $ conversion on the price, which will make it a 6-figure sale.

[Bronty]

prototype artwork.

 

is that a term that's popular in britain, or something you've coined Terry? just curious. Always referred to it as 'concept' 'prelim' etc so not sure if this is a truck/lorrie situation

[Nexus]

Curious to hear what the underwater painting went for, Gene?

 

Well, that's another thing - there's no public record of it and the auction house won't disclose the information even after the fact. One person told me $40Ks and another told me low $60Ks (maybe one # was before BP and one after BP?) but have yet to hear a definitive number from anyone.

 

At Heritage or Christie's (the latter sold a McGinnis concept painting from Diamonds are Forever for 6-figures a few years ago - definitely not as good nor nearly as well-known as either McCarthy Thunderball image), I have no doubt that prices would have been much higher. Regardless of what the actual figure was, it reflected a big "under the radar" discount to FMV.

 

$53K. Same with Jetpack ("Look Up!"). Estimate was $40K. Great under-the-radar buys. Must be maddening to know the auction was held in NYC...you could have attended and walked out with both!

 

Results were formerly listed on AuctionClub. No more, as it appears they are no longer able to use Paddle8 data.

[Terry Doyle]

 

Jetpack original . . .

 

All four components are superb, I hasten to add.

[Terry Doyle]

prototype artwork.

 

is that a term that's popular in britain, or something you've coined Terry? just curious. Always referred to it as 'concept' 'prelim' etc so not sure if this is a truck/lorrie situation

 

Thing is, Bronty, movie poster original art is a new area for collecting to me - so I'm pretty much on a learning curve (taking my cue from the UK dealer who's been specialising in this stuff for a long time). Terminology might be a UK thing, though I expect Mitch will be better qualified to elaborate.

 

Far as I've been able to ascertain, whenever a client (we're talking UK) commissioned a movie poster campaign, he was given a final (finished) poster original - chosen from several stages of preliminary art. A 'rough' (or prelim) might be the initial (loose) depiction . . . with prototypes being the next stage up - in a more polished version of designs to choose from.

[delekkerste]

$53K. Same with Jetpack ("Look Up!"). Estimate was $40K. Great under-the-radar buys. Must be maddening to know the auction was held in NYC...you could have attended and walked out with both!

 

Paddle8 is an online-only auction house (or, at least they were at the time of this sale - they subsequently merged with another auction house). The auction was organized by their London division and the online catalog said the artwork would ship from the U.K.

 

But, yeah - if they had done a better job with publicity, these paintings could have done 2-3x higher, I suspect. Maybe even more!

[delekkerste]

Robert McGinnis "Diamonds Are Forever" prototype artwork (1971) sold for £79,500.

 

You'd have to do a £ to $ conversion on the price, which will make it a 6-figure sale.

 

Yup - 79,250 pounds or $129,574 at the time of the sale. The McCarthy paintings are far superior to this one, IMO, and sold for a bargain price.

[Terry Doyle]

Agreed.

[Bronty]

prototype artwork.

 

is that a term that's popular in britain, or something you've coined Terry? just curious. Always referred to it as 'concept' 'prelim' etc so not sure if this is a truck/lorrie situation

 

Thing is, Bronty, movie poster original art is a new area for collecting to me - so I'm pretty much on a learning curve (taking my cue from the UK dealer who's been specialising in this stuff for a long time). Terminology might be a UK thing, though I expect Mitch will be better qualified to elaborate.

 

Far as I've been able to ascertain, whenever a client (we're talking UK) commissioned a movie poster campaign, he was given a final (finished) poster original - chosen from several stages of preliminary art. A 'rough' (or prelim) might be the initial (loose) depiction . . . with prototypes being the next stage up - in a more polished version of designs to choose from.

 

Okay thanks. I wonder if it isn't a term your particular dealer uses more than anything. In looking at that Diamonds are Forever link they just call it a concept also.

 

And yeah these pre-final pieces can be anything from chickenscratch to works of art in themselves. For sure.

[Terry Doyle]

prototype artwork.

 

is that a term that's popular in britain, or something you've coined Terry? just curious. Always referred to it as 'concept' 'prelim' etc so not sure if this is a truck/lorrie situation

 

Thing is, Bronty, movie poster original art is a new area for collecting to me - so I'm pretty much on a learning curve (taking my cue from the UK dealer who's been specialising in this stuff for a long time). Terminology might be a UK thing, though I expect Mitch will be better qualified to elaborate.

 

Far as I've been able to ascertain, whenever a client (we're talking UK) commissioned a movie poster campaign, he was given a final (finished) poster original - chosen from several stages of preliminary art. A 'rough' (or prelim) might be the initial (loose) depiction . . . with prototypes being the next stage up - in a more polished version of designs to choose from.

 

Okay thanks. I wonder if it isn't a term your particular dealer uses more than anything. In looking at that Diamonds are Forever link they just call it a concept also.

 

And yeah these pre-final pieces can be anything from chickenscratch to works of art in themselves. For sure.

 

Oh, absolutely. I've bought a few 'prototype' paintings that (upon first glance) are difficult to differentiate from the final painting.

[Terry Doyle]

Here's an example of a (UK) prototype artwork that was passed on in favour of another (similar) design:

 

 

"I've Gotta Horse" prototype movie poster painting by Tom Chantrell

 

And here's the version that was used for the movie poster campaign:

 

 

"I've Gotta Horse" final (used) design by Tom Chantrell

 

As I'm sure you'll agree, the prototype is quite detailed and finished for what is (effectively) a preliminary piece of art (no doubt, one of several variations presented to the client for final consideration). A lot more detailed than a 'rough'.

 

On a personal note, I was born in Liverpool, UK, and my era of nostalgia was the 1960s. Billy Fury, likely to be an unknown outside of the UK, was a Liverpool-born singer highly-popular during the era (so there is a personal connection at play, here);

 

"Ronald William Wycherley (17 April 1940 – 28 January 1983), better known by his stage name Billy Fury, was an English singer from the late 1950s to the mid 1960s, and remained an active songwriter until the 1980s. Rheumatic fever, which he first contracted as a child, damaged his heart and ultimately contributed to his death. An early British rock and roll (and film) star, he equalled the Beatles' record of 24 hits in the 1960s, and spent 332 weeks on the UK chart."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Crowzilla]

First, he ended up with the underwater scene painting, not the jetpack painting. Second, I didn't "let" anyone have either painting. The auction went under-the-radar (at a the London subsidiary of a small online-only auction house who had never previously auctioned off this kind of material) and I didn't even hear about it until Nixdorf posted his painting on Facebook weeks later.

 

.

 

This is only half-right. Both paintings were at the auction, Tom and a friend went in with the idea to get them both, and they did.

 

[delekkerste]

First, he ended up with the underwater scene painting, not the jetpack painting. Second, I didn't "let" anyone have either painting. The auction went under-the-radar (at a the London subsidiary of a small online-only auction house who had never previously auctioned off this kind of material) and I didn't even hear about it until Nixdorf posted his painting on Facebook weeks later.

 

.

 

This is only half-right. Both paintings were at the auction, Tom and a friend went in with the idea to get them both, and they did.

 

Yes, exactly. Tom, who I've known for many years, told me the whole story back in December in private. He ended up with the underwater scene painting, but not the jetpack painting, which went to his friend (yes, they collaborated beforehand), which makes my above statement more than just half-right.

[Crowzilla]

 

Toho loaned all of Ohrai's Godzilla paintings to the exhibit on him last year. They have not been shy about displaying them and all are quite large and impressive in person.

 

Do you have any additional pictures Sean? Of either the Toho pieces or the Koei pieces in particular?

 

At least one:

 

 

There is always a no photography request at these exhibits, and the Japanese seem far more respectful of such things than we are.

You can see a few pics here though of the Godzilla ones: http://entertainmentstation.jp/17560/

 

And this might be the game things you are looking for: http://s.webry.info/sp/nekoreset.at.webry.info/201309/article_7.html

[Crowzilla]

Yes, exactly. Tom, who I've known for many years, told me the whole story back in December in private. He got the underwater scene painting, but not the jetpack painting, which went to his friend (yes, they collaborated beforehand), which makes my above statement more than just half-right.

 

Sounds good to me.

[delekkerste]

Yes, exactly. Tom, who I've known for many years, told me the whole story back in December in private. He got the underwater scene painting, but not the jetpack painting, which went to his friend (yes, they collaborated beforehand), which makes my above statement more than just half-right.

 

Sounds good to me.

 

 

Now the question is, where is the 4th painting from the Thunderball quad poster by McGinnis.

[Crowzilla]

 

Now the question is, where is the 4th painting from the Thunderball quad poster by McGinnis.

 

Like the panel says, that is really the one to Look Out for. I like it much more than YOLT.

 

[Bronty]

Thanks Sean, yeah there's a couple Koeis halfway down. Never seen pics of the originals before