This logo isn't from the Australian one sheet poster I recently posted that I was after? Where have this image originated from John ?
Lawrence, you said that the fact that Warner Brothers Inc did not appear on the shield was a major factor in saying that it was not original release. The closeup photo clearly shows that the words Warner Brothers Inc do in fact appear on the shield. Does this change your opinion?
This logo isn't from the Australian one sheet poster I recently posted that I was after? Where have this image originated from John ?
Lawrence, you said that the fact that Warner Brothers Inc did not appear on the shield was a major factor in saying that it was not original release. The closeup photo clearly shows that the words Warner Brothers Inc do in fact appear on the shield. Does this change your opinion?
Sea Hawk 3 sheet also has Warner Brothers Inc across the logo.
Not at all as I have an image of a 1959 film Australian Warner Bros. 3 sheet with the plain WB shield with the WB separated by a dot pre 1938 style printed on it and both The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk logos possibly were just copied off original U.S. artwork for the re-releases I believed happened in Australia. I am still relying on the Victory Publicity logo as my proof in this matter. Thanks for the logos but please send me the images of VP Lithographed & Printed by Victory Publicity Pty. Ltd. identification on any Australian film posters pre 1944 to disprove my thoughts on this matter?
Addressed to David. Would you mind posting a close up of the Warner Bros logo off an Australian one sheet of yours which is Private Detective ( 1939 ) which appeared in the June 2015 thread.
Addressed to David. Would you mind posting a close up of the Warner Bros logo off an Australian one sheet of yours which is Private Detective ( 1939 ) which appeared in the June 2015 thread.
I don't think this will prove anything. I'd rather see like with like, 3SH vs 3SH. As I said before not all 1SH printers were 3SH printers.
Before when you sent this message and I opened it I believe after you sent The Little Foxes image I had all the proof I need that The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk 3 sheets are re-release posters. I have to attend to another pressing matter so I will return shortly with my findings and what I believe is proof. I can't thank you enough Mark for the image.
Addressed to David. Would you mind posting a close up of the Warner Bros logo off an Australian one sheet of yours which is Private Detective ( 1939 ) which appeared in the June 2015 thread.
I don't think this will prove anything. I'd rather see like with like, 3SH vs 3SH. As I said before not all 1SH printers were 3SH printers.
I think it might have helped a little but if you don't wish to oblige that is your right. As it turns out though I don't require it now but it may have proved a point nevertheless and I intend to prove my beliefs without 3 sheets identification which are extremely rare and the chances of this happening is remote.
Don't forget that one sheets are on a smaller scale. They may have had a different (larger) template for their three sheet logos.
Thanks for that but nevertheless I am in the middle of checking on something but I am positive I have all the proof I require, in my mind at least, to prove my case.
I know we aren't talking Australian 3 sheets examples here as they are near impossible to find pre 1950, let alone pre 1940.
All the following RKO titles that I have been able to locate from the 1930s through to 1941 that were one sheets printed by Victory Publicity have the printer's logo shown above at top in this format only.
The titles are-
1936. A Woman Rebels.
1937. A Damsel In Distress, Wise Girls.
1938. Having Wonderful Time.
1941. Dumbo, The Little Foxes, Mr. & Mr. Smith.
I have also one from 1945 and this being The Brighton Strangler.
F. Cunninghame appears to have mainly printed pre-1936 and post 1941 RKO one sheets.
I am now positive 1945 was the year VP was introduced at the front of the printers credits on both Warner Bros. and RKO Australian posters. 1945 had both with and without the VP appearing. I'm sure from 1946 onwards all posters printed by Victory Publicity for Warner Bros.,RKO, United Artists and other distributors all would have had VP on them. On countless images I have checked they do.
If VP was introduced on daybill and one sheet posters in 1946 why would eight years before two 3 sheet posters from 1938 have this later logo on them? They have to be re-releases for this reason plus where are any 1930's 3 sheet images at all? It appears that the only two that we do happen to have images for are from the 1930s were re-released in 1949 and 1950. Coincidence - I think not!
Once again I will as I had previously done with the RKO 4 star logo thread in the past where I had had asked for poster images to be posted to prove my information incorrect ( and it hasn't happened to date ), I will again, to back up my firm belief what I believe is correct, ask for any images from any Australian film posters with the VP appearing on the printers credits for any films released before 1945.
2 ) Between 1934 - 1937 from U.S. records the logo that appeared on film posters was just WB appearing in a shield shape. Then between 1937-1938 the wording Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc. was added across the centre of the WB logo.
Lawrence, you were obviously not aware that the undated Australian Robin Hood 3 sheet had Warner Brothers Pictures Inc printed across the logo when you posted the above. Are you now saying that this is no longer relevant in dating the poster?
I for one am not so convinced, specially as you are comparing apples and pears or in this case, 3SH vs 1SH.
You would have to agree that not all printers of the 1SH printed the corresponding 3SH (or even the Daybill for that matter) so simply saying because the 1 Sheet looked like this then it must be true that the 3SH must look like this too is off the mark.
You would have to agree that sometimes printers got things wrong.
You haven't provided any comparable 3SH examples and your 'proof' is only merely based on probabilities based on a different type of posters. I think rather than requiring everyone else to come up with images to prove you wrong surely the onus is on you to provide images that prove you are right.
I have nothing to gain or lose about this poster but I for one am not going to tell the buyer (who ever they may be) he has a dud nor am I going to scream blue murder that the auctioneer got it wrong either, nor should others either.
I think you're to be commended on the effort you went to with the research, and I am happy enough if you believe you are right, but I don't think it should be entered into law just yet.
Interestingly enough, the plain Warner Brothers shield appears on the 1947 Dark Passage, similar logo style used to the Torchy Blane in Panama bill? Then the Italians have a completely different logo.
Just one more point about this. You are saying that the onus is on others to prove you wrong by providing examples of various posters. I don't think it works that way. You are saying that Heritage made a mistake with their descriptions. The onus is actually on you to prove that your findings are correct as you are the one who raised this.
I don't know when the Robin Hood Australian one sheet was printed. You may well be correct about it being a reissue but the concern I have is that you seem to have backed away from your original findings about the WB logo.
3) The wording Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. Present which appeared on the top of Warner Bros. posters roughly around this time is missing from the 3 sheet.
The above comment was one of the three major points you used in saying that the Australian poster was a reissue. The original US three sheet which is strikingly similar to the Australian three sheet in question does not have any mention of Warner Bros. Pictures Presents on it. So, does this mean that we can discount Point 3 of your original findings?
3) The wording Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. Present which appeared on the top of Warner Bros. posters roughly around this time is missing from the 3 sheet.
The above comment was one of the three major points you used in saying that the Australian poster was a reissue. The original US three sheet which is strikingly similar to the Australian three sheet in question does not have any mention of Warner Bros. Pictures Presents on it. So, does this mean that we can discount Point 3 of your original findings?
Yes as I had based this statement on information on Warner Bros. logos I had located on the net. I had thought the logo information would have applied to Australia as well as the U.S.A. but I now know it didn't apply to Australia. Actually this has turned out to be a godsend as I now have some information which I am currently working on that will help me greatly to support my case.
I feel like I am under fire here but all is well as I like a challenge when I believe I am right I can be persistent in attempting to accomplish my goals to convince people to accept information that I believe to be correct.
Don't feel like you are under fire. This is all great research but we should cover every possibility. I hope that we actually get something definitive from it all and it doesn't end up like the Wizard of Oz one sheet where there will always be some doubt.
One other point I would like to make is that the Australian undated three sheet was obviously copied directly from the original 1938 US three sheet. Do you think that it might be more likely that it was copied at the time of the first release in 1938? If it is a 1949 re release, it seems very unlikely that they would be able to find an original US three sheet to copy and they would usually come up with something different for a re release.
Comments
That re release has a different WB logo to the one that Heritage sold.
This logo isn't from the Australian one sheet poster I recently posted that I was after? Where have this image originated from John ?
You can magnify the image on HA's site for the one sheet.
Here are a few more pics of interest:
Not at all as I have an image of a 1959 film Australian Warner Bros. 3 sheet with the plain WB shield with the WB separated by a dot pre 1938 style printed on it and both The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk logos possibly were just copied off original U.S. artwork for the re-releases I believed happened in Australia. I am still relying on the Victory Publicity logo as my proof in this matter. Thanks for the logos but please send me the images of VP Lithographed & Printed by Victory Publicity Pty. Ltd. identification on any Australian film posters pre 1944 to disprove my thoughts on this matter?
Noticed this one yesterday:
http://movieposters.ha.com/itm/drama/the-little-foxes-rko-1941-australian-one-sheet-27-x-40-beautiful-artwork-for-one-of-bette-davis-best-dramatic-film/a/636-28721.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515#
BTW Hackett Offset produced a 24 sheet for Sullivan's Travels 1941, so they definitely printed larger posters. See HA for poster.
Addressed to David. Would you mind posting a close up of the Warner Bros logo off an Australian one sheet of yours which is Private Detective ( 1939 ) which appeared in the June 2015 thread.
Here's an early Victory logo, Lawrence:
http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/archiveitem/4244770.html
I think it might have helped a little but if you don't wish to oblige that is your right. As it turns out though I don't require it now but it may have proved a point nevertheless and I intend to prove my beliefs without 3 sheets identification which are extremely rare and the chances of this happening is remote.
Thanks for that but nevertheless I am in the middle of checking on something but I am positive I have all the proof I require, in my mind at least, to prove my case.
All the following RKO titles that I have been able to locate from the 1930s through to 1941 that were one sheets printed by Victory Publicity have the printer's logo shown above at top in this format only.
The titles are-
1936. A Woman Rebels.
1937. A Damsel In Distress, Wise Girls.
1938. Having Wonderful Time.
1941. Dumbo, The Little Foxes, Mr. & Mr. Smith.
I have also one from 1945 and this being The Brighton Strangler.
F. Cunninghame appears to have mainly printed pre-1936 and post 1941 RKO one sheets.
I am now positive 1945 was the year VP was introduced at the front of the printers credits on both Warner Bros. and RKO Australian posters. 1945 had both with and without the VP appearing. I'm sure from 1946 onwards all posters printed by Victory Publicity for Warner Bros.,RKO, United Artists and other distributors all would have had VP on them. On countless images I have checked they do.
If VP was introduced on daybill and one sheet posters in 1946 why would eight years before two 3 sheet posters from 1938 have this later logo on them? They have to be re-releases for this reason plus where are any 1930's 3 sheet images at all? It appears that the only two that we do happen to have images for are from the 1930s were re-released in 1949 and 1950. Coincidence - I think not!
Once again I will as I had previously done with the RKO 4 star logo thread in the past where I had had asked for poster images to be posted to prove my information incorrect ( and it hasn't happened to date ), I will again, to back up my firm belief what I believe is correct, ask for any images from any Australian film posters with the VP appearing on the printers credits for any films released before 1945.
Thanks Sven.
- You would have to agree that not all printers of the 1SH printed the corresponding 3SH (or even the Daybill for that matter) so simply saying because the 1 Sheet looked like this then it must be true that the 3SH must look like this too is off the mark.
- You would have to agree that sometimes printers got things wrong.
You haven't provided any comparable 3SH examples and your 'proof' is only merely based on probabilities based on a different type of posters. I think rather than requiring everyone else to come up with images to prove you wrong surely the onus is on you to provide images that prove you are right.I have nothing to gain or lose about this poster but I for one am not going to tell the buyer (who ever they may be) he has a dud nor am I going to scream blue murder that the auctioneer got it wrong either, nor should others either.
I think you're to be commended on the effort you went to with the research, and I am happy enough if you believe you are right, but I don't think it should be entered into law just yet.
Interestingly enough, the plain Warner Brothers shield appears on the 1947 Dark Passage, similar logo style used to the Torchy Blane in Panama bill? Then the Italians have a completely different logo.
http://movieposters.ha.com/c/search-results.zx?N=54+790+231&chkNotSold=0&Ntk=SI_Titles&Nty=1&Ntt=dark+passage&ic4=KeywordSearch-071515
I don't know when the Robin Hood Australian one sheet was printed. You may well be correct about it being a reissue but the concern I have is that you seem to have backed away from your original findings about the WB logo.
Yes as I had based this statement on information on Warner Bros. logos I had located on the net. I had thought the logo information would have applied to Australia as well as the U.S.A. but I now know it didn't apply to Australia. Actually this has turned out to be a godsend as I now have some information which I am currently working on that will help me greatly to support my case.
I feel like I am under fire here but all is well as I like a challenge when I believe I am right I can be persistent in attempting to accomplish my goals to convince people to accept information that I believe to be correct.
One other point I would like to make is that the Australian undated three sheet was obviously copied directly from the original 1938 US three sheet. Do you think that it might be more likely that it was copied at the time of the first release in 1938? If it is a 1949 re release, it seems very unlikely that they would be able to find an original US three sheet to copy and they would usually come up with something different for a re release.
What does everyone think?