Sounds more like a way to give fakers full details! Bad idea.

I agree, it could be a useful resource. As has been pointed out by a few people already, that although these can be copied, a 'perfect' fake is near to impossible. But in some cases it may require close inspection and a keen eye.

For some people it will be thier only chance to own a banksy screenprint. The flowers are pulled from the same actual screen as the liita triptych basically registration prints. And as you say at the moment it's an incomplete image but you never know that might not always be the case.

Seeing the back of the rat print, it's definitely a screenprint. What looks like a debossing effect is buckling/warping in the paper from the moisture in water-based ink. It's absorbed into the thin paper and causes expansion/contraction at the edges where printed area meets unprinted area. This is hardly noticeable on most prints on somewhat heavy stock but on thin butcher papers and stock that is lighter than the typical 80 lb stock that your desktop printer uses it becomes very noticeable. It also explains why each clock is different. Banksy smears the black printed ink of the rat to create a kind of monotype effect that becomes the grey areas of the rat on the clocks.

Yeah printing on tracing paper is the worst. It's really anything that has cellulose and/or super thin that buckles/warps.

I bet the drunk woman I saw using her Flowers print as lightsaber is probably gonna regret that decision.

These are SCREENPRINTS of iconic images, from source, from BANKSY. Dreadful paper considering they were mostly in the hands of kids in the rain and rolled up so every dent is multiplied by 10 but I’m really surprised how these are seen as mere posters in collectors eyes. It’s clever and fun and self sabotaging, typical Banksy. Framed up these are art, just embrace the crudity of the paper!
Anybody have ideas about the ‘extra’ shading in this print of mine, looks as if the rat design has been edited subtly over time.

From the thrower description on GDP site-

"This is Banksy’s first experiment with a new technique for making prints - spray the stencil onto processing film and expose the result directly onto a silk screen. This avoids photography or computer manipulation and creates a super accurate analogue representation of gestural mark making. In other words - looks pretty dope."


Isn't a leap in logic to assume these are printed using the same process - looks pretty dope indeed

I bought one, really like it, collectors collect stuff, its all part of the deal

I am shit at getting stuff primary, so was cheap, bought, frame ordered, sorted

It looks like bleed out residual/ghosting or water/solvent residual/ghosting. Ink bleed out can come from too much ink being forced thru the screen and bleeding out on the paper. The ink then gets on the underside of the screen and transfers to each subsequent print, slowly dissipating as the ink residue decreases and/or dries out, unless it's cleaned immediately. Similarly if it's water/solvent.

I will add some detailed images for you to cross check

looks fake to me

seen here i now think its just a digital error and not on the actual paper

www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Banksy-Gross-Domestic-Product-Clock-Rat/254382241013?hash=item3b3a5cf4f5:g:288AAOSwCX5dn3G-

They are not banksy fans , £200-400 is still a weeks wages for some , turning up for 5 mins for a free print to gain that much they are laughing and the kids 6 months -year pocket money in an instant .
two years time the mint ones will be highly sought , seen some advertised with drawing Paul Insect in !😵🙈
edit: put P I n s  and Paul insect auto corrected🤔😆