Posted by Clint Dixon [74.206.62.210] on Sunday, June 29, 2014 at 09:32:53 :
Hypothetical situation: Someone buys an old painting - let's say the Mona Lisa. They restore it or have someone restore it, and in the end they may have something that looks like a Picasso. If their goal was attained and they feel the money they spent was worth it - good for them - they should be proud to show it to the world and it is really no one else's business anyway as to how the final product came about. But, can they call it "restored" when they try to flip it in the hopes of making a buck? Or could doing so be considered false advertising?
There appear to be a lot more people who have enough money to buy a da Vinchi or a Picasso, than those who actually know enough to tell the difference between the two.
We have enjoyed about four decades of growing interest in the collecting and refurbishing of the Dodge Power-Wagon without the cloud of concourse point judging hanging over our heads. Maybe it is time to take the steps to change that and come up with a list of what defines "restored" and what doesn't before all is lost and the next generations have only the word of good sales people to go by.
Junior
Follow Ups: