Balboa
New Member
Posts • 975
Likes • 1,407
November 2007
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Balboa on Oct 13, 2014 9:14:20 GMT 1, Am I wrong to avoid buying something I really like because it has tape damage on the reverse?
It's not going to be visible in a frame but something tells me that I'm not going to be able to block out the fact that it's there.
I think my standards may be too high when it comes to condition.
It's a 2003 signed Banksy.
Am I wrong to avoid buying something I really like because it has tape damage on the reverse?
It's not going to be visible in a frame but something tells me that I'm not going to be able to block out the fact that it's there.
I think my standards may be too high when it comes to condition.
It's a 2003 signed Banksy.
|
|
Trevorm
Junior Member
Posts • 1,160
Likes • 763
August 2010
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Trevorm on Oct 13, 2014 9:31:47 GMT 1, It has an effect on price - if you're going to keep it as an investment.
Doesn't bother me too much, I've got a framed HMV that I know has tape issues + probable discolouration from being mounted and stuck in a Neilsen frame when it was originally purchased from AR in Brighton about 10 years ago. Still looks great.
It has an effect on price - if you're going to keep it as an investment.
Doesn't bother me too much, I've got a framed HMV that I know has tape issues + probable discolouration from being mounted and stuck in a Neilsen frame when it was originally purchased from AR in Brighton about 10 years ago. Still looks great.
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Deleted on Oct 13, 2014 9:38:49 GMT 1, Am I wrong to avoid buying something I really like because it has tape damage on the reverse? It's not going to be visible in a frame but something tells me that I'm not going to be able to block out the fact that it's there. I think my standards may be too high when it comes to condition. It's a 2003 signed Banksy.
Obviously one without tape issues will be worth a bit more 
Am I wrong to avoid buying something I really like because it has tape damage on the reverse? It's not going to be visible in a frame but something tells me that I'm not going to be able to block out the fact that it's there. I think my standards may be too high when it comes to condition. It's a 2003 signed Banksy. Lots of early Banksys were framed using masking tape etc, they were cheap prints so people werent likely to spend 100's on conservation framing, lots have tape removal marks, better the non conservation tape removed and leave a tape mark on the back than leave it there to do more damage in the long run, if it hasnt damaged the print image/front then isnt a big issue, lots of early banksys have issues of some sort, tape removal on the back is a minor issue imo if it hasnt affected the image/front of the print, the banksy print market will have to have to be more leniant to minor issues as so many have them, they were handled like cheaper prints rather than investable works of art. Obviously one without tape issues will be worth a bit more |
|
|
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Happy Shopper on Oct 13, 2014 10:06:26 GMT 1, I'm pretty sure many high value prints you see at auction, making 100s of thousands, like Warhol prints, etc, all have some kind of similar damage. They're bound to.
I have bought prints with tape damage. It doesn't bother me. It's on the back!
I'm pretty sure many high value prints you see at auction, making 100s of thousands, like Warhol prints, etc, all have some kind of similar damage. They're bound to.
I have bought prints with tape damage. It doesn't bother me. It's on the back!
|
|
Balboa
New Member
Posts • 975
Likes • 1,407
November 2007
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Balboa on Oct 13, 2014 11:05:29 GMT 1, It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs
If it wasn't north of £6k then I wouldn't be quite so concerned.
It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs If it wasn't north of £6k then I wouldn't be quite so concerned. |
|
alexdb
New Member
Posts • 823
Likes • 682
February 2012
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by alexdb on Oct 13, 2014 11:17:17 GMT 1, It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs
As long as it is not heavily damaged, you should enjoy art. So without seeing the background of your Banksy print, I can only ask to you: Do you enjoy the art? If so, keep enjoying. :-)
It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs Haha, you are quit right in that. I have been to galleries where they were using gloves for the prints that was so called street art / urban art. A print or canvas or other mixed media thing should 'live'. What I mean is that people should be able to touch it, that it can damage a little bit over time. As long as it is not heavily damaged, you should enjoy art. So without seeing the background of your Banksy print, I can only ask to you: Do you enjoy the art? If so, keep enjoying. :-) |
|
|
|
|
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Coach on Oct 13, 2014 11:22:06 GMT 1, It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs
Have to agree. Just a tiny bit of tape residue on this one!!!
It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs Have to agree. Just a tiny bit of tape residue on this one!!! |
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Tape damage to reverse of prints, by Deleted on Oct 13, 2014 12:03:24 GMT 1, It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs
Amen. If you can't see the tape, go for it
It's quite ironic that most collectors on these forums collect "street art", "urban art", and they worry about tape residue on the back of prints and little marks. Get them on the wall and bloody enjoy them ffs Amen. If you can't see the tape, go for it |
|
