Am I being too anal?

UPS got you down? eBay making you cry? Need to rant? Do it here.
Hey everyone. I just dropped $867 on a Saddam print from the bay. Im super stoked and have been after this uber rare gem for a while. When the seller listed this, he had put on the listing that it was mint, but the pictures he posted seemed to say otherwise so I asked him for some more pics. He said there was some normal wear on the print from it being so old as well as a small blemish which is barely visible but looks like its from printing. I understand the nature of the older prints and that you rarely find one in pristine condition so I guess Im wondering if I had paid too much, should I be upset that the seller said it was mint even though he kinda retracted it after sending me the pics? Im keeping the print, just wondering if I got screwed, or should I shut up since I scored an really old and rare print. Thanks peeps!
User avatar
Prints_of_Thieves
Propaganda Engineer
 
Posts: 887
Joined: Oct 6, 2009

I think he shouldn't have said it was mint but there are some prints I'd take if they had fire damage. I'd say be happy with it. I just sold mine and I already wish I didn't although I'm happy someone else will enjoy it.
User avatar
leglescow
Posse
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Jun 17, 2010
Location: Charleston SC

leglescow wrote:I think he shouldn't have said it was mint but there are some prints I'd take if they had fire damage. I'd say be happy with it. I just sold mine and I already wish I didn't although I'm happy someone else will enjoy it.



thanks bro, I feel better now lol.
User avatar
Prints_of_Thieves
Propaganda Engineer
 
Posts: 887
Joined: Oct 6, 2009

i wouldn't worry about it. read what TheOmethod wrote about it in the other thread:
viewtopic.php?p=339263#p339263
User avatar
conartstudio
Sergeant Politeness
 
Posts: 10667
Joined: Jan 12, 2007

fribhey wrote:i wouldn't worry about it. read what TheOmethod wrote about it in the other thread:
viewtopic.php?p=339263#p339263


yeah I did, just wanted some extra reassurance lol, thanks once again guys.
User avatar
Prints_of_Thieves
Propaganda Engineer
 
Posts: 887
Joined: Oct 6, 2009

My thought is rare prints like that are rarely mint, and I have been willing to take some prints with damage just to get them. If the Saddam was actually mint, you probably wouldn't have it in your hands right now for the price you paid. You should definitely be proud to own it. That being said, don't list stuff as mint if it's not. Lame.
User avatar
djsp
Giant
 
Posts: 2614
Joined: Feb 28, 2007
Location: Sacto, Ca

You should be stoked to have it. This one rarely comes up for sale.
Wanted: Obey prints on Postal Paper
User avatar
circa77
Giant
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Jan 9, 2007
Location: California

I think there is less of a "perfect" expectation the older something is. The reason antiques have charm is because each show their age in different ways. Most experienced collectors understand that older prints, especially 12 year old prints are going to have slight character differences.

I remember back in 2001 being totally annoyed that my Worker print had a white spot in the black area. As an inexperienced collector I considered filling the spot in with a Sharpie. But now I know that this was a natural anomaly from the screen being clogged or damaged and most of the run had the same mark. The mark adds charm and is proof that a human hand was involved in the manufacturing process.
User avatar
TheOmethod
Ministry of Information
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Aug 18, 2006
Location: Southern California

TheOmethod wrote:I think there is less of a "perfect" expectation the older something is. The reason antiques have charm is because each show their age in different ways. Most experienced collectors understand that older prints, especially 12 year old prints are going to have slight character differences.

I remember back in 2001 being totally annoyed that my Worker print had a white spot in the black area. As an inexperienced collector I considered filling the spot in with a Sharpie. But now I know that this was a natural anomaly from the screen being clogged or damaged and most of the run had the same mark. The mark adds charm and is proof that a human hand was involved in the manufacturing process.


Thanks mayne! I agree with the charm thing. It's like the Japanese philosophy of "Wabi-Sabi", essentially finding beauty in imperfections.
User avatar
Prints_of_Thieves
Propaganda Engineer
 
Posts: 887
Joined: Oct 6, 2009

Prints_of_Thieves wrote:Thanks mayne! I agree with the charm thing. It's like the Japanese philosophy of "Wabi-Sabi", essentially finding beauty in imperfections.


+1, I never eat sushi without it.
Wanted: Obey prints on Postal Paper
User avatar
circa77
Giant
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Jan 9, 2007
Location: California

There's 2 issues here, what the seller represented and how some condition issues go with the territory on older prints.

Yes, definitely heed what the others are saying and enjoy your print. I honestly think you got a good deal on it. However, there aren't varying definitions of "mint." If the seller represented something as being mint - it should be perfect. Otherwise he should have listed it as "near mint", "practically mint", etc. Any printing anomalies, especially from the hand-pullled days are a bonus. But if there was wear from being old then he should have pointed that out at first.

Regardless, you scored a gem at a very fair price. Congrats!
The Lincoln Squirrel has been assassinated! - Kent Brockman
User avatar
cybernigel
Giant
 
Posts: 7157
Joined: Apr 3, 2007
Location: Denver


Return to Giant vs Giant

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest