Goldstone items for sale

[Herr Tubthumper]

Right I'm going to chip in a bit here.

Ultimately I guess that it is all down to people's desires BUT to me there is a big difference between having a print and a limited edition personally printed and signed by the photographer. Or having an original by any artist for that matter.

I've got a few bits and bobs hanging on the walls of Tubthumper Towers. As an example I've got a lovely photo of Mick and Keith recording Gimme Shelter from the Let It Bleed sessions printed and signed by Robert Altman (the photographer not the film director). He sent it from his home on the West Coast of America. I struck up a brief correspondence with him and I adore it. He was there, he took it and he sent it to me. It has a lot of gravity because of this. It is more than just what you see with your eyes. I'm sure you can trawl the net and find a reproduction of this photo but to me that feels quite hollow, merely ornamental. My photo is a link to the very sessions for one of my favourite albums.

£75 or not is one thing, but please dont knock the idea of limited editions.

 

[The Great Cornholio]

Right I'm going to chip in a bit here.

Ultimately I guess that it is all down to people's desires BUT to me there is a big difference between having a print and a limited edition personally printed and signed by the photographer. Or having an original by any artist for that matter.

I've got a few bits and bobs hanging on the walls of Tubthumper Towers. As an example I've got a lovely photo of Mick and Keith recording Gimme Shelter from the Let It Bleed sessions printed and signed by Robert Altman (the photographer not the film director). He sent it from his home on the West Coast of America. I struck up a brief correspondence with him and I adore it. He was there, he took and and he sent it to me. It has a lot of gravity because of this. It is more than just what you see with your eyes. I'm sure you can trawl the net and find a reproduction of this photo but to me that feels quite hollow, merely ornamental. My photo is a link to the very sessions for one of my favourite albums.

£75 or not is one thing, but please dont knock the idea of limited editions.

I'm not sure what posts you are referring to but I can't see anyone "knocking" limited editions. Just a succession of people saying that they would not pay £75 for an unframed, black and white photographic print and the fact that they are still on sale, years after release, suggests that we are not the only ones. I paid more than £75 for a non limited edition, unsigned photograph of the Playoff final because that was how I judged its worth. I paid more for my print of an original painting because that was how I judged its worth. Regardless of the significance or rarity, Stewart's photo is, to me, an arty black and white photographic print on cardboard. The significance of the moment and the signatures makes its perceived value to me around £20 and I was then delighted to get it for £10. But the simple fact is that I would never countenance paying £75 for it. And it seems as if I am not alone.

In the grand scheme of things, no-one would care what I or others think. But when the photographer takes it upon himself to start attacking people he gave free rein to sell 100 copies to and then turns upon people as being not real supporters, people are bound to feel the need to express their feelings on the matter. And the majority seem to agree with me - £75 is far too much for the product offered regardless of the circumstances.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

but limited edition or not, there is no way I would pay £75

It was a response to this line. This sentence, to me, is slightly dismissive of the concept of limited editions. Stewart Weir also made a comment about the concept of limited editions.

That's all, it's not that bigger deal.

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

We buy cheap frames from ebay from a company called picturepleasure - very good range in all sizes right up to large poster sizes - and incredibly cheap. http://myworld.ebay.co.uk/picturepleasure

 

[The Great Cornholio]

It was a response to this line. This sentence, to me, is slightly dismissive of the concept of limited editions. That's all, it's not that bigger deal.

As I explained, the fact it is a limited edition does not increase its value to £75 for me. Combined with the history and the signatures, it makes its value to me around £20. Not limited edition = £10-15. Not signed as well = £5-10. That may be heresy to the artist but seems to reflect the general mood of a large number of the potential buyers.

 

[The Great Cornholio]

We buy cheap frames from ebay from a company called picturepleasure - very good range in all sizes right up to large poster sizes - and incredibly cheap. http://myworld.ebay.co.uk/picturepleasure

TBH - the fact the print sat so long in its envelope rather backs up my point regarding my perception of its worth. I would look in Woolworths, Wilkinsons, ESK etc when I was there but never went out of my way to try and find a frame. Eventually ESK got some in stock and I have a nice silver finish frame and I am pleased it is on the wall. But the fact I never really bothered to check EBay shows that I was never going to pay much more for it than I did.

Anyway, done this to death now!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'm not sure what posts you are referring to but I can't see anyone "knocking" limited editions. Just a succession of people saying that they would not pay £75 for an unframed, black and white photographic print and the fact that they are still on sale, years after release, suggests that we are not the only ones. I paid more than £75 for a non limited edition, unsigned photograph of the Playoff final because that was how I judged its worth. I paid more for my print of an original painting because that was how I judged its worth. Regardless of the significance or rarity, Stewart's photo is, to me, an arty black and white photographic print on cardboard. The significance of the moment and the signatures makes its perceived value to me around £20 and I was then delighted to get it for £10. But the simple fact is that I would never countenance paying £75 for it. And it seems as if I am not alone.

In the grand scheme of things, no-one would care what I or others think. But when the photographer takes it upon himself to start attacking people he gave free rein to sell 100 copies to and then turns upon people as being not real supporters, people are bound to feel the need to express their feelings on the matter. And the majority seem to agree with me - £75 is far too much for the product offered regardless of the circumstances.

You also make reference to 'black and white photos on cardboard.' I also think is dismissive of the idea of limited editions. They are more than just this. As I mentioned the price of £75 is not what I was posting about...its the concept of limited editions and their perceived lack of 'value.'

 

[bristolseagull]

I gave the club 950 copies of More Than Ninety Minutes books and they sold them for £19.95. I gave the Supporters club 100 prints and they gave them away for £5 instead of at least £60..

So why should i share the profit with the club? Why dont you share some of your income with them?

Stewart Weir

http://23fotos.com

I do mate, I pay to go to every home game, I buy the match programme, I buy merchandise from the club shop, and have contributed in other ways such as the 40 notes fund and by purchasing memorabilia at the various club auctions.

 

[The Great Cornholio]

You also make reference to 'black and white photos on cardboard.' I also think is dismissive of the idea of limited editions. They are more than just this. As I mentioned the price of £75 is not what I was posting about...its the concept of limited editions and their perceived lack of 'value.'

Ah - so you are telling me what I should think. Got you. There was me thinking I knew what value I put on things. Thanks for correcting me.

BTW - I have a picture of my cat - I will only print 3 so they are ultra limited. They are unframed, 1 inch square but have a unique paw print on the back. Shall I put you down for all 3?

 

[Deleted User X18H]

Ah - so you are telling me what I should think. Got you. There was me thinking I knew what value I put on things. Thanks for correcting me.

BTW - I have a picture of my cat - I will only print 3 so they are ultra limited. They are unframed, 1 inch square but have a unique paw print on the back. Shall I put you down for all 3?

I'll have one of your cat if there is still some going. How much? Is it a Tom?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Ah - so you are telling me what I should think. Got you. There was me thinking I knew what value I put on things. Thanks for correcting me.

BTW - I have a picture of my cat - I will only print 3 so they are ultra limited. They are unframed, 1 inch square but have a unique paw print on the back. Shall I put you down for all 3?

No, in my mind your comments, and a number of others, seem to be a tad dismissive of the concept of limited editions vs photographs that's all. I posted a general reply initially. As for your cat prints, I'll pass. As a tip though, print the fourth paw...label it as a '1 of 1' and you'll be laughing....as long at the Cat Society dont undermine you.

 

[The Great Cornholio]

I'll have one of your cat if there is still some going. How much? Is it a Tom?

However flippant my point, it still stands. You cannot dictate to someone how valuable having a 'limited edition' is. In this case, my perception is that 500 is not that limited considering the potential audience. And the presentation is a definite drawback for me in this case as I received a black and white photograph on card. Not like my limited edition print of the painting of the Goldstone which comes is a nice frame with a nice surround and small plaque. Again, the limited edition part was not what made me buy this painting as 750 is an awful lot to shift to such a limited market.

I bought a nice coloured coin of the moon landing recently - not because it was limited edition but because it was nicely presented, at a good price and something that appealed to me. I am now innundated by offers for special limited edition coins, stamps, pictures etc. In the case of the Westminster Collection and others of its ilk, the term limited edition is nothing more than a marketing gimmick as they were never likely to exceed the limit anyway. I, like most people, buy things if they appeal to me and are priced according to my perceived value. I once paid £400 for an animated Warner Brothers picture that was limited to 9500 worldwide. Now that is a limited edition that pushes the value up for me and I would dearly like the Pepe Le Pew one but the only one available is worth well over the original price. A limited edition of a unique, well presented work of art limited to 9500 with tens if not hundreds of millions of potential customers is for me the definition of a limited edition. 500 copies with a potential of maybe 10-20000 customers is not and only increases the value to me very slightly, if at all.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

As I explained, the fact it is a limited edition does not increase its value to £75 for me. Combined with the history and the signatures, it makes its value to me around £20. Not limited edition = £10-15. Not signed as well = £5-10. That may be heresy to the artist but seems to reflect the general mood of a large number of the potential buyers.

But would you agree that the limited edition would have more 'value' (in what ever manner you choose to measure value) than a mere photograph on cardboard?

 

[The Great Cornholio]

But would you agree that the limited edition would have more 'value' (in what ever manner you choose to measure value) than a mere photograph on cardboard?

No - not at all. That is what I am saying. Sometimes making it limited increases its value, sometimes not. A coin from Westminster is just a coin. Because they make it an arbitrary limit, does that make it worth more? Not in my book in most cases.

My flippant point still stands. If I print a picture of my cat and make 10 - does that make that picture more valuable? Of course not as no-one wants it. A quick internet search sees the limited edition More than 90 minutes going for pretty much its original RRP. However, the non limited edition Build a Bonfire goes for at least 3 times its RRP because it was a limited print run. Just making something a limited edition does not increase its value per se. It only increases its value if demand outstrips supply and this does not seem to be the case with this particular print.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

No - not at all. That is what I am saying. Sometimes making it limited increases its value, sometimes not. A coin from Westminster is just a coin. Because they make it an arbitrary limit, does that make it worth more? Not in my book in most cases.

My flippant point still stands. If I print a picture of my cat and make 10 - does that make that picture more valuable? Of course not as no-one wants it. A quick internet search sees the limited edition More than 90 minutes going for pretty much its original RRP. However, the non limited edition Build a Bonfire goes for at least 3 times its RRP because it was a limited print run. Just making something a limited edition does not increase its value per se. It only increases its value if demand outstrips supply and this does not seem to be the case with this particular print.

This is where we differ then. In my view it does. Knowing there are, and will only be, a limited number does hold some 'value' to me.

It can also serve as an investment. I'm not really bothered about this but I have became aware that one screen print I have has almost doubled in price since I bought it. But to me this is not where the value lies.

 

[The Great Cornholio]

This is where we differ then. In my view it does. Knowing there are, and will only be, a limited number does hold some 'value' to me.

It can also serve as an investment. I'm not really bothered about this but I have became aware that one screen print I have has almost doubled in price since I bought it. But to me this is not where the value lies.

Are you really telling me that every single thing ever sold as a limited edition has its intrinsic value increased? Perhaps Barnum was right.

 

[stewart weir]

I'm not sure what posts you are referring to but I can't see anyone "knocking" limited editions. Just a succession of people saying that they would not pay £75 for an unframed, black and white photographic print and the fact that they are still on sale, years after release, suggests that we are not the only ones. I paid more than £75 for a non limited edition, unsigned photograph of the Playoff final because that was how I judged its worth. I paid more for my print of an original painting because that was how I judged its worth. Regardless of the significance or rarity, Stewart's photo is, to me, an arty black and white photographic print on cardboard. The significance of the moment and the signatures makes its perceived value to me around £20 and I was then delighted to get it for £10. But the simple fact is that I would never countenance paying £75 for it. And it seems as if I am not alone.

In the grand scheme of things, no-one would care what I or others think. But when the photographer takes it upon himself to start attacking people he gave free rein to sell 100 copies to and then turns upon people as being not real supporters, people are bound to feel the need to express their feelings on the matter. And the majority seem to agree with me - £75 is far too much for the product offered regardless of the circumstances.

Just seen this post.. I donated 100 prints and asked Tim Carder to offer the prints at £75 and no less. The objective was to help raise £7,500 for the society to raise funds for the club museum and to buy in future historically important items. The supporters club then apparently 'voted' to sell for £5 to members and £10 to non members. The value of the individual prints was judged by myself to be £75 for the historical importance of the event, the signatures each print possess and even though an edition of 500 may seem large in the scheme of things it is not. This edition will not be repeated. I have yet to hear from Tim Carder regards the price reduction and Im rather disappointed because instead of raising £7,500 they got less than 10%..

Stewart Weir

 

[Brightonfan1983]

I've just seen this post too. I'm disgusted.

At myself. For not having seen it earlier. Are there any prints left?

 

[NMH]

PS If anyone would rather collect said items than have them posted, let me know. I am not a million miles from Withdean Stadium.

Did you, through any grapevine, get my idea of Albion commemorative stamps and stationary for fans?

If not, I've put it to you now.

I imagine signed framed photos to commemorate our opening match at Amex will have already been put into place with the business department. They'll sell well.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Interesting read this thread, has to be said.