Tintin Forums

Tintinologist.org Forums / Tintin collectibles (official merchandise only) /

Misleading photographs used to sell Tintin books online.

MrCutts
Member
#1 · Posted: 19 Jun 2011 14:04
This morning I found out that there is a stock photograph of the 1959 Golden Press edition of The Crab with the Golden Claws that a lot of sellers use to sell non Golden Press editions.

I found this out whilst looking on an auction site and saw a photo of the 1959 Golden Press edition in a description. The seller wanted very little for the book so I thought this is either the bargain of the century or something was wrong. When I looked at another auction site another seller was using the same photo of the book cover. The cover had the same scuff marks. I then looked in two big second hand book auction sites and discovered the same photo being used by a series of different sellers. Some of the books I looked at online were 1991 editions but non were the 1959 edition that the photo suggested they were.

Personally I think that sellers and dealers use of the same stock 1959 Golden Press edition photograph to sell another Crab with the Golden Claws books is very misleading. I nearly got fooled into buying the cheap copy I saw first because, apart from the photo, there was very little description. I haven't looked but I imagine other 1959 Golden Press stock photos are being used to sell other publications of the same books.
jock123
Moderator
#2 · Posted: 19 Jun 2011 16:43
It's best in such situations to assume that there is ignorance on the part of the seller in cases like this, and just to ask them. Most folks won't know that there is any difference from one publisher to the next, and will assume that "all books look alike", and are "the same".

Unless they are claiming to have the Golden Press versions of the books (which remember, aren't really that rare - only the increase in collecting of the titles has driven the price up on books which, a scant two or three years ago, were selling for £10-£15) in the description as well, just check.
If you are deliberately misled, you have cause to complain.

It's more to do with Google than anything else, I'd think - someone searches for an image to use, grabs the first one which comes to hand, and sticks it on.
Wrong? Yes...
Questionable? Yes...
Lazy? Yes...
...But also understandable.

The classic one for me is people using the image which shows the cover of Tintin and the Broken Ear (sic), a publicity image which has knocked around for years, was used on the rear of the books, but The Broken Ear has always said The Broken Ear as far as can be told, so it's an obvious lift from somewhere else.
MrCutts
Member
#3 · Posted: 20 Jun 2011 10:14
Hi Jock.
I imagine that large book sellers don't check the actual book against the stock photo they use. It seems to be the case. They probably don't have the time to so.
Like you say it's understandable and probably not deliberately misleading. However I find it slightly annoying that they don't bother to check.
I wonder how many people have bought the books thinking they were buying what was shown in the photo and then have had to complain and return the book?

Personally I never buy second-hand goods which use a stock photo as part of the description.
I had not seen or remembered the stock photo of the Golden Press Crab book so I was fooled for a little while until I checked others for sale online.

Thanks for the info regarding the stock photo of The Broken Ear. I hadn't noticed that.
When the book is described orally then it does tend to come out as "Tintin and the broken ear".
Why would someone want to add "and the" on the cover? Seems a bit silly.
Maybe someone wanted to make it look like the title of the Picaros book.
jock123
Moderator
#4 · Posted: 20 Jun 2011 11:39
MrCutts:
Why would someone want to add "and the" on the cover?

To include the word "Tintin" in the title, I imagine?
The title on the spine is actually always (again, as far as I know) Tintin and the Broken Ear; this is quite a reasonable thing, if you think about it, as it puts the main subject/ point of interest front-and-centre, and anything which helps a book get noticed is a good thing.
Taken alone The Broken Ear is a fairly insipid title, and possibly suggests an academic text on deafness; stick "Tintin and" in there, and it becomes immediately identifiable as a tale of mystery and adventure!
MrCutts
Member
#5 · Posted: 21 Jun 2011 11:13
I see what you are saying but nope, I still can't think why someone would bother to change the image of the book cover in Photoshop or whatever and rewrite the title when the word Tintin is on there anyway.

Anyway, my grevience was about was the use of stock photos of a 1959 Golden Press book when you're actually selling a 1970's paperback Crab book.
I think this is very misleading, be it intentional or not.
Before I realised what I was looking at, I had sent a question to the first seller I saw the other day using a Golden Press Crab book image.
I asked about the condition of the book. Their reply mentioned that due to the nature of their warehouses they couldn't provide any more information.
They said to read the description and if you are disappointed in any way with the book it could be returned for a full refund.
The description just said it was in 'good condition' and that was basically all they had had written.
I replied saying that due to the poor nature of their description and the fact I would probably have to return the book at my own expense I wouldn't buy from them.

I have to say I've got nothing against the use of stock photos but for a Tintin book sellers should at least try and use the image of the right publication.

I'm probably taking this all a bit too seriously but I'm just thinking of the poor buyers who don't get what they think they are buying.

Now where's that phone number for Watchdog? :)

Moderator Note: Your obvious disappointment aside, it has to be pointed out that no one has altered the cover of Broken Ear in Photoshop: it was provided by the publisher or Casterman, and was/ has been used for official publicity purposes for decades. The physical book has never had the longer title on cover, and its cover title and spine don't match, which has led to years of confusion.

Please be sure to familiarize yourself with the Forum Posting Guidelines.

Disclaimer: Tintinologist.org assumes no responsibility for any content you post to the forums/web site. Staff reserve the right to remove any submitted content which they deem in breach of Tintinologist.org's Terms of Use. If you spot anything on Tintinologist.org that you think is inappropriate, please alert the moderation team. Sometimes things slip through, but we will always act swiftly to remove unauthorised material.

Reply

 Forgot password
Please log in to post. No account? Create one!