Featured ANYONE EVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS POSTER FROM AMERICAN ADVERTISING MUSEUM?

I found this cool poster a couple of weeks ago; it says along bottom edge that it is from the American Advertising Museum.
I found the museum when googling to find this poster, but I can't find another - could this be a ...like a Dali exhibition poster for a art museum, this was for a exhibition at the advertising museum?

What would you title this for listing it to sell - can I call this 'Pop Art'?
Advertising Pop Art?
(I like) Consumer Pop Art Exhibition Poster for American Advertising Museum?
Thanks for any help.

 

Journey, how about Iconic Brands Pop Art?

 

Unless there's something about an exhibition on the poster somewhere, I don't think you should waste precious title space on "exhibition." But I do like the "iconic brands" in SBSVC's post.

 

I like it
Iconic Brands Pop Art Poster?
Litho?
Or just Iconic Brands Pop Art?

Also - Should I put it in posters or prints?

 

Forget last one; I will put in both!
Thanks

 

I'd put as many of the product and brand names in the title as will fit. That will get eyes on your listing from people who collect those items.

 

And if you want to put it into two categories, I think I'd put it in posters and advertising. Not sure which subcategory under advertising, though.

 

LOVE the poster !!! ... Joy.

 

Original removed.

The Museum's story is rather sad, along with that of the Eisner. Wondering if this poster wasn't related to this exhibition: Their exhibits included displays on icons from the advertising world, "Aunt Jemima Meets Mr. Peanut"

Can anyone read the signature: David M. Da____?

 

David M. Dain?

 

That's what I thought too, but wasn't a successful search. To confuse things, there's an artist named Dai David who wants to get into things all the time.

 

Question is, is this an original signature, not just part of the print? Looks to me like it is, but WDIK?

 

There is a David Dair. Does not seem a likely candidate.

 

I also spent some time looking for various spellings of the sig.

But.

While there's composition here, there's no real sign that the creator was anything more than the museum's "graphics monkey." (Not speaking disparagingly -- "graphics monkey" is a title I've worn proudly. ) So maybe not someone who will be found as an artist.

While it is undoubtedly the subject(s) that will sell this, I am wondering about the print process. Any chance of getting macro shots of a couple different areas?

 

True, it's more like a collage. But would museum have had him sign them? It's odd for a poster in that there is nothing in the graphic design that says it's for anything. You have to read the fine print to make any connection with the museum. It's more like Warhol's Campbell's soup can.

 

A Welsh name, give the guy a break.

 

I was wondering abut that as well. Usually the name of the "graphics monkey" would be in small printed letters somewhere, right?

 

Just for fun on this topic:

https://www.invaluable.com/catalog/xy7f8u0gpb

 

Graphics Monkeys don't necessarily get their name printed anywhere. "Work for hire" means employee gets their regular paycheck and that's all the recognition they need.

Who knows what that sig is... what this piece is... it was done the year before the museum opened, so maybe this was originally made as the background for an advertisement of some sort -- or a series of ads. It would totally explain how everything is crowded at the bottom -- put text on the top.

I do suspect that, as mentioned earlier, the signature is part of the print ... but jpg artifacts may explain the "dotted" look of the sig.

It could have been signed by the Graphics Monkey for a limited run just made up for employees. Or signs for inside the museum.

Or David M could be a world renown artist whose sig is just too sloppy to make out. I dunno. It's so recent, I think it should be findable, but I've had zero luck with that.