88/89 Back2Back Memorabilia Frame

[vikingpimp]

Hi guys,

I don't write here often, but this has irritated me enough to get my goat. Basically I've ordered (and had delivered) the 88/89 Back2Back signed guernsey, which was limited to 89, which I love in itself. It's the supporting pictures which get me annoyed. It's all the AFL logos on players' guernseys, some of which look really sloppily photoshopped. I shouldn't have to explain why this is annoying, especially when the main photos are from photos during the victory parades - but even these manage to irritate me through redundancy. Two photos of Platten - especially when he couldn't even remember when the cup was on his head, let alone the day (not to mention that the other main photo was in 1990 or afterwards, due to the AFL logo)?

All I ask is that memorabilia is vetted properly, because I paid £300 (around $550) on top of this to get it to the UK - seeing AFL symbols on the guernseys takes me out of the timewarp this jersey should take me to, back to when I was 10-11 years old and loving my heroes - the AFL symbol almost symbolises adulthood to me, and I lose that sort of innocent feeling I was looking for with this particular piece.

I've submitted a few photos to show you guys what seems like Photoshop with the AFL logo, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but there may be some anomalies due to being taken after the fact (Dermie for instance, didn't have short hair in either of those premierships, but here he is in profile).

Don't get me wrong. I love having all the autographs, just the photos throw things out of date with all the AFL logos (which of course didn't come until later)

This might not have been a consideration back in the day, but when someone spends almost £1000 on something, it is a touch annoying, and they must expect from anal footy fans like me who are going to pick these things up.

I'm not looking for recourse, or compensation, just that clubs and the AFL pay attention to just how scrutinised these things can get, especially when a month's pay is the outlay.

I've posted this here, but is it more main board?

 

[vikingpimp]

Here are the photos:

 

[vikingpimp]

I guess I'm mostly wondering if this is a common thing with memorabilia? It's the first above $100 piece I've ever bought and I was expecting it to be perfect (moronically?)

 

[Del33640]

I guess I'm mostly wondering if this is a common thing with memorabilia? It's the first above $100 piece I've ever bought and I was expecting it to be perfect (moronically?)

Don't blame you there, that looks pretty average. I don't know what whomever signed off on that graphic design work was thinking, but I'd be expecting a lot more - really lowers the tone.

 

[Steven Tyler]

Hi guys,

I don't write here often, but this has irritated me enough to get my goat. Basically I've ordered (and had delivered) the 88/89 Back2Back signed guernsey, which was limited to 89, which I love in itself. It's the supporting pictures which get me annoyed. It's all the AFL logos on players' guernseys, some of which look really sloppily photoshopped. I shouldn't have to explain why this is annoying, especially when the main photos are from photos during the victory parades - but even these manage to irritate me through redundancy. Two photos of Platten - especially when he couldn't even remember when the cup was on his head, let alone the day (not to mention that the other main photo was in 1990 or afterwards, due to the AFL logo)?

All I ask is that memorabilia is vetted properly, because I paid £300 (around $550) on top of this to get it to the UK - seeing AFL symbols on the guernseys takes me out of the timewarp this jersey should take me to, back to when I was 10-11 years old and loving my heroes - the AFL symbol almost symbolises adulthood to me, and I lose that sort of innocent feeling I was looking for with this particular piece.

I've submitted a few photos to show you guys what seems like Photoshop with the AFL logo, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but there may be some anomalies due to being taken after the fact (Dermie for instance, didn't have short hair in either of those premierships, but here he is in profile).

Don't get me wrong. I love having all the autographs, just the photos throw things out of date with all the AFL logos (which of course didn't come until later)

This might not have been a consideration back in the day, but when someone spends almost £1000 on something, it is a touch annoying, and they must expect from anal footy fans like me who are going to pick these things up.

I'm not looking for recourse, or compensation, just that clubs and the AFL pay attention to just how scrutinised these things can get, especially when a month's pay is the outlay.

I've posted this here, but is it more main board?

Don't mean to be a smart arse, but didn't you look at it before ordering?

 

[TurboBreuster]

My guess is that it hasn't been photoshopped. The AFL logos on the player's guernseys is a result of images from 1990 onwards been used, which is still very poor IMO.

One would assume that an expensive piece, that's celebrating the 88-89 back to back flags, would use images from those two seasons.

 

[wheelie_hawk]

Obviously you want something that is sold for good money to look professional and be good value... I made my own memorabilia this year, bought a cheap buddy frame and a jumper signed at the family day. Then asks my bro (who works in sign writing) to frame up... Looks great and all for around $200. op shops are great for frames too. Just a thought for people looking for something special, you don't have to pay the earth, even if you don't have a bro who can frame, things can be done cheaper.

 

[vikingpimp]

Don't mean to be a smart arse, but didn't you look at it before ordering?

To be perfectly honest, I didn't scrutinise it too closely before I bought it - having a look on the website photo, the logos don't really stand out. The one thing I focused on a bit was the double use of Platten in the main pics, which I forgave. The piece itself is massive, so the logos become more apparent when you sit down and study it once it's on the wall. Caveat emptor I guess!

 

[butchy]

There's no photoshop there, they are 1990 pictures. Can tell by the household finance sponsor logo.
Still pretty ordinary though, would have thought the 88 and 89 player pics would be used.
I was lucky enough to attend the 88/89 celebration at crown and in the process of finishing off my own piece.
Just need Dermie and Langers to sign before framing them up.

These are the pics they SHOULD have used.