The above are three Australian daybill posters that were printed for the 1955 'b film' The Looters. This film was destined to be screened on the bottom half of a double bill programme The first image was obviously printed for the first Australian release, but what about the other two posters, What would be the reason for printing the two follow up versions. Any thoughts? Interesting to note that the two later printed posters had an upgrade in the film's censorship rating.
When I booked film titles from the major 16mm film distributors that were to be screened at the film society that I was involved with, I always received numerous copies of original daybills with every booking. If one takes into account the large number of 16mm commercial screenings, then later numerous club screenings and film society screenings that would have been sent daybills, this would certainly account for a large number of required posters for these screenings. I am thinking that after the original number of printed posters were despatched to theatres numbers then would have dwindled, so cheaper designed versions and stock posters for 16mm distribution were printed.
The following Across The Wide Missourt and The Naked Spur daybills printed for 1950's films in what appears to be in the 1970's would have to have been surely printed for later 16mm bookings.
The Naked Spur original Australian daybill and the shortened incorrectly titled Naked Spur poster that would appear the printer's had little artwork to have assisted the poster artist.
I think in a lot of those cases of bad artwork on poorly drawn posters it's a matter of "just draw a poster for me before you go on your lunch break". Very little time allocated to the design and execution of the designs. It really looks like they were given to a work experience junior to get some experience on. God knows what effort we'd have if they'd tried to copy the original daybill!. Forgive me if I'm denigrating the "artists" who drew the designs...but really!
I think in a lot of those cases of bad artwork on poorly drawn posters it's a matter of "just draw a poster for me before you go on your lunch break". Very little time allocated to the design and execution of the designs. It really looks like they were given to a work experience junior to get some experience on. God knows what effort we'd have if they'd tried to copy the original daybill!. Forgive me if I'm denigrating the "artists" who drew the designs...but really!
Interesting comments which may well be true., but my printed for 16mm remarks are what I am most interested in hearing thoughts about.
Treasure Island (1950) and Pollyanna (1960) rare daybill posters originally printed for 16mm only distribution for the company 16mm Pty Ltd. They had to have been printed for distribution in a fair period of time after the original release of the films took place in the cinema . My guess is possibly this was in the late 1960s. These are the only two examples of daybill posters being printed for 16mm release and credited as such.
Comments
The above are three Australian daybill posters that were printed for the 1955 'b film' The Looters. This film was destined to be screened on the bottom half of a double bill programme
The first image was obviously printed for the first Australian release, but what about the other two posters, What would be the reason for printing the two follow up versions. Any thoughts?
Interesting to note that the two later printed posters had an upgrade in the film's censorship rating.
The following Across The Wide Missourt and The Naked Spur daybills printed for 1950's films in what appears to be in the 1970's would have to have been surely printed for later 16mm bookings.
The Naked Spur original Australian daybill and the shortened incorrectly titled Naked Spur poster that would appear the printer's had little artwork to have assisted the poster artist.
Peter