Shepard Fairey Master Index Dossier 26: 2006–2004 Release Cohort

Cohort scope

This dossier studies a defined cohort of 17 Shepard Fairey releases selected from the Gauntlet Gallery master index, spanning 2006 through 2004. The cohort begins with Godfather - The Don and concludes with Make Art Not War in the index sequence. It is designed as comparative research rather than as a set of isolated product summaries. The aim is to see how editions, media, publishers, and available public-sale evidence relate across a manageable group of releases.

The cohort contains 17 Screen Print. Recorded publishers include Obey Giant (17). The index associates 608 cleaned public-sale observations with these entries in aggregate. That number is not a cohort valuation and should not be used as one. It simply describes the quantity of recorded transaction evidence currently available under the index methodology.

Why a cohort reading is useful

Fairey’s output is expansive enough that a single title can seem self-explanatory when viewed alone. In practice, a work becomes more intelligible when set beside other releases from a similar period or adjacent catalog sequence. A cohort can reveal a changing balance among screenprints, letterpress works, giclée editions, collaborations, music subjects, political graphics, and publisher relationships. It can also show where the market record is thick enough for comparison and where the available evidence remains too sparse for confident conclusions.

This report retains a necessary distinction between edition-level facts and individual objects. The master index provides a title, year, edition designation, stated edition size, medium, publisher, and observed sales data where available. An actual offered work requires separate inspection: images of the front and reverse, signature or edition notation when applicable, corners, margins, condition, framing, documentation, and seller history. The index organizes questions; it does not answer every question about a specific sheet.

How to read the release dossiers

Each entry below follows the master-index record. It does not invent a visual description or an authentication conclusion that the data cannot support. Instead, it identifies the indexed fields, explains why medium and edition language matter, and frames the recorded market evidence as a comparison tool rather than a guarantee. This methodology is deliberately conservative. In a category where listing titles and edition claims can drift, clarity about what is known is more useful than a more dramatic but unsupported narrative.

Godfather - The Don

The master index records Godfather - The Don as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 500, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Godfather - The Don forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 500 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 3 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $406.25, with an observed low-to-high range of $119.99 to $2,000.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Godfather - The Don, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Godfather - The Don is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Godfather - Sonny

The master index records Godfather - Sonny as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 500, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Godfather - Sonny forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 500 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 6 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $215.90, with an observed low-to-high range of $170.80 to $700.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Godfather - Sonny, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Godfather - Sonny is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Godfather - Fredo

The master index records Godfather - Fredo as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 500, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Godfather - Fredo forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 500 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 6 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $900.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $343.75 to $3,000.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Godfather - Fredo, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Godfather - Fredo is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Filth & Fury

The master index records Filth & Fury as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Filth & Fury forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 6 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $179.50, with an observed low-to-high range of $100.00 to $299.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Filth & Fury, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Filth & Fury is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Molotov Man

The master index records Molotov Man as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Molotov Man forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 11 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $595.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $124.99 to $1,500.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Molotov Man, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Molotov Man is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Eagle Mountain

The master index records Eagle Mountain as a 2006 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Eagle Mountain forms part of the 2006 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 19 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $300.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $110.00 to $1,079.84. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Eagle Mountain, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2006 yearbook, Eagle Mountain is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Revolution Woman

The master index records Revolution Woman as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 50, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Revolution Woman forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 50 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 9 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $750.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $224.72 to $1,499.99. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Revolution Woman, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Revolution Woman is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Unknown Black Panther

The master index records Unknown Black Panther as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Unknown Black Panther forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 4 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $549.50, with an observed low-to-high range of $300.00 to $999.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Unknown Black Panther, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Unknown Black Panther is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Bones Ripper

The master index records Bones Ripper as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Bones Ripper forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 6 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $474.50, with an observed low-to-high range of $124.99 to $750.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Bones Ripper, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Bones Ripper is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Lenin Record

The master index records Lenin Record as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Lenin Record forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 13 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $375.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $124.99 to $700.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Lenin Record, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Lenin Record is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Giant vs Giant 2

The master index records Giant vs Giant 2 as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 450, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Giant vs Giant 2 forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 450 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 1 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $549.99, with an observed low-to-high range of $549.99 to $549.99. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Giant vs Giant 2, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Giant vs Giant 2 is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Obey Collage Girl

The master index records Obey Collage Girl as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Obey Collage Girl forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 1 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $1,259.81, with an observed low-to-high range of $1,259.81 to $1,259.81. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Obey Collage Girl, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Obey Collage Girl is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Stay Up Chaka

The master index records Stay Up Chaka as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Stay Up Chaka forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 10 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $649.37, with an observed low-to-high range of $99.00 to $3,900.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Stay Up Chaka, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Stay Up Chaka is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Warhol

The master index records Warhol as a 2005 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Warhol forms part of the 2005 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 346 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $391.90, with an observed low-to-high range of $90.00 to $3,799.97. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Warhol, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2005 yearbook, Warhol is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Giant vs Giant

The master index records Giant vs Giant as a 2004 release: First Edition, stated edition size 150, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Giant vs Giant forms part of the 2004 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 150 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 2 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $725.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $500.00 to $950.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Giant vs Giant, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2004 yearbook, Giant vs Giant is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Mr Spray

The master index records Mr Spray as a 2004 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Mr Spray forms part of the 2004 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 52 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $193.69, with an observed low-to-high range of $90.00 to $2,578.99. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Mr Spray, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2004 yearbook, Mr Spray is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Make Art Not War

The master index records Make Art Not War as a 2004 release: First Edition, stated edition size 300, medium Screen Print, published by Obey Giant. This combination of fields establishes the entry’s edition-level identity. It does not establish the condition, completeness, or authenticity of any individual example offered for sale. The first task for a collector is to make sure that a listing’s title, medium, edition language, and publisher information genuinely correspond to this indexed record rather than merely resembling it.

The title itself belongs to the wider field of Fairey’s public-facing image practice, where language, symbolism, portraiture, and graphic design can function simultaneously. The master index is deliberately cautious here: it records the work name but does not attempt to turn an index title into a complete visual description. That restraint matters. A collector should consult high-quality images and primary release information before making a thematic interpretation. What can be said from the record is that Make Art Not War forms part of the 2004 release roster, and its medium and publisher place it within the production ecology tracked for that year.

Screenprint collectors should assess ink surface, paper character, margins, and handling carefully. The stated edition size of 300 is a supply descriptor, not a ranking system. It can help frame comparisons, but it does not determine desirability, condition, or eventual resale outcomes. A collector comparing examples should ask whether the works are genuinely the same edition, whether the notation is complete, whether any Artist’s Proof or variant language is involved, and whether the listing photographs support the claims being made. A smaller number is not a substitute for a clear object record.

The master index contains 113 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $250.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $90.00 to $3,250.00. These figures should be read as a set of past observations, not a valuation. The range may incorporate object-level differences, different sale dates, weak or strong documentation, framing, venue, and catalogue accuracy. Where the count is modest, each sale carries more weight and deserves closer scrutiny. Where the count is larger, it improves the available reference set but still does not remove the need to compare like with like. Asking prices are not included in the logic of this paragraph; completed transactions and listing claims are different kinds of evidence.

For an individual example of Make Art Not War, build a small research file before committing. Save the listing text, request full front and reverse photographs, inspect the signature and edition area if present, and document the corners and any condition issues. Retain invoices, certificates, and seller messages together. If framed, ask whether the work is floated, hinged, or mounted; ask about glazing, visible margins, and whether the frame is part of the purchase. This object file is a practical form of provenance. It does not manufacture certainty, but it preserves the evidence a collector actually has.

Within the 2004 yearbook, Make Art Not War is useful as a reminder that a release roster is not a shopping list. The index helps define the field of comparison, while the collector’s work is to decide which image, process, condition state, and documentation standard genuinely fit a collection. The strongest acquisition logic combines visual conviction with clear records and a realistic view of total cost, including shipping, framing, conservation, and the possibility of holding the work for a long time.

Research appendix: making a durable annual record

The 2026 roster should be treated as an invitation to compare records, not as a final authority over an object. Indexing is a disciplined form of reduction: it turns a complicated work into fields that can be compared across a large corpus. Title, year, edition designation, edition size, medium, publisher, and observed sales are enormously useful fields, but none of them describes the complete life of an individual sheet. The release record establishes a research hypothesis. The object, images, paperwork, and chain of custody either support that hypothesis or complicate it.

This distinction is especially valuable for print collecting because the edition is both a group and a set of individual objects. Two impressions can share a title, date, and numbered edition while having very different visual presence because of paper handling, corner condition, prior framing, light exposure, ink surface, or a missing document. The annual index cannot adjudicate those differences. It can help a collector recognize that they matter, build a list of questions before purchase, and preserve an answer after purchase.

When using comparable sales, record more than the number. Save the sale date, venue, title language, edition notation, whether the object was signed or numbered, the visible condition, and whether a frame or certificate was included. Then ask whether the offered work matches those conditions closely enough to make the comparison informative. A low result may reflect damage or uncertainty; a high result may reflect presentation, provenance, timing, or an unusually motivated buyer. The most honest conclusion is often a range of possibilities rather than a single target price.

The same caution applies to publisher and medium. A publisher credit helps distinguish a release context, and a stated process tells a collector what object-level details to inspect. Neither field is a quality guarantee. A screenprint, letterpress, lithograph, or other process should be described correctly and evaluated according to its material realities. If the listing evidence is incomplete, the appropriate response is to ask for better documentation or to price uncertainty into the decision—not to fill gaps with assumptions.

For records management, keep a single folder for each acquisition. Include the original listing, an invoice, the seller correspondence, full arrival photographs, condition notes, any certificate, and a framing record. Photograph the front, reverse, signature or edition area, and corners before the work is framed or moved. If the work is insured, add the policy record. These small steps make a collection legible to its future self. They also allow a collector to describe an object accurately without relying on memory years later.

Finally, collect with a point of view. An annual release roster can encourage completism, but completeness is not the only coherent strategy. A collection may be organized around political graphics, music-related work, ornamental imagery, a particular print process, a publisher relationship, or simply the works that remain visually compelling over time. The purpose of research is not to eliminate taste. It is to give taste a stronger factual foundation and to make the eventual choice clearer, more defensible, and easier to live with.

Dossier 26: collector conclusions

The value of a comparative cohort is not that it ranks the releases automatically. It gives a collector a structured field of view. The entries may share a period or catalog proximity while differing sharply in process, stated edition size, publisher, subject, and market visibility. Those differences should lead to better questions, not to a simplistic hierarchy.

For any offered example, begin with the exact index record and then build an object file: preserve the listing, request clear front and reverse photographs, inspect edition and signature information where relevant, note condition, and save invoices and correspondence. Compare completed sales only after accounting for meaningful differences in medium, edition, condition, documentation, framing, timing, and venue. The most durable collection is built around works that are visually persuasive and administratively legible.

Continue research through the Shepard Fairey collection, the buyer’s guide, the authentication checklist, and the price guide. This dossier is an index-led research aid, not an appraisal or forecast.