Dear Brad, 

I wanted to thank you for taking the time today to show me your extremely impressive Osiris/Hapshash poster
collection and share your considerable expertise on the subject.  As I told you, the Osiris collection I brought over 
today has been in storage for more than 20 years--and happily they matched your originals perfectly.  It was fascinating 
to compare them to the bootlegs you showed me.  When you have a real one next to a bootleg, as you say on your site, 
it is clear that the "recently discovered" ones are indeed fakes (excellent as they may be.)  I thought I'd write down 
some of the big differences, just so I had it for my files, and while I was at it, forward you a copy.

First off, the bootlegs really are excellent reproductions.  Someone worked very hard to get these as good as possible.

It's obvious when comparing them that the originals are silkscreens, while the bootlegs are clearly printed and not silkscreened.
On the real thing you can easily see areas where the screens (and thus layers of ink) didn't exactly line up, and there is a bit of one
color bleeding out from underneath another color.  There are also some places where a lot of one color of ink is built up over 
lot of another color ink, and there is a three dimensional aspect to the color.  This was really visible in areas like the top corners 
of the CIA/UFO Pink Floyd poster, where the red paisley shapes are printed on top of a LOT of silver ink--viewed from an angle
you can see an outline where it really becomes three dimensional.  And on the bootleg, it's just flat as can be--clearly not
ink on top of ink.  You can also see the difference between silkscreening and printing on the Tomorrow "My White Bicycle" 
poster.  The bootleg has tiny silver flecks printed on the solid black type above "Tomorrow" and in the black areas of the
top right, which wouldn't be possible with silkscreening.

Second, you are absolutely right about the lack of detail in the reproductions.  This was really apparent with the smaller
lines and dots on the Tomorrow, Hendrix at the Fillmore, Zappa and CIA/UFO Floyd posters.  Comparing them close up it was
clear which was the original and which the bootleg just seeing the detail that was missing on the boots. On the CIA/UFO, 
the silver comet trail in the top right corner is made up of a very even distribution of silver dots, while the bootleg is missing 
many of these in the middle.  And the areas on all of the posters with lots of dots or small line patterns was far less clear on 
the boots than the originals.

It was interesting to see the Hendrix/Fillmore bootleg has a different credit line (beginning with "OA103 Printed in England.....") from the
definite originals (which begins "Printed in England/OA 103....",) not to mention the pronounced clear "halo" around the type and 
Jimi's headdress on the bootlegs.

Again, you're right that the real posters aren't exactly the same size as the bootlegs--but since there are some unscrupulous
people out there, and there probably were some irregularity on paper sizes, I think your point about not getting too
obsessed with the small size differences is right.

And finally, I couldn't agree more with your thoughts on the paper.  The paper they used for the bootlegs just isn't the same,
and even when looking at perfect condition originals that have been carefully stored, the backs just don't look brand new
as the bootlegs do.

Thanks for your scholarship on this stuff, and for your website.  I think you'll save a lot of people a lot of money with your

Jeff Gold



On Apr 20, 2007, at 8:31 PM,