Shepard Fairey Master Index Dossier 27: 2004–2003 Release Cohort
Cohort scope
This dossier studies a defined cohort of 17 Shepard Fairey releases selected from the Gauntlet Gallery master index, spanning 2004 through 2003. The cohort begins with World Odor and concludes with Radicals 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 (16), MOCA Los Angeles (1). The index associates 137 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.
World Odor
The master index records World Odor 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 World Odor 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 9 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $512.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $129.28 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 World Odor, 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, World Odor 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.
Hendrix
The master index records Hendrix 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 Hendrix 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 67 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $429.99, with an observed low-to-high range of $95.00 to $16,800.00. 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 Hendrix, 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, Hendrix 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.
Public Works Medal
The master index records Public Works Medal 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 Public Works Medal 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 3 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $230.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $218.41 to $340.00. 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 Public Works Medal, 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, Public Works Medal 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.
Chinese San Francisco
The master index records Chinese San Francisco 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 Chinese San Francisco 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 7 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $575.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $295.00 to $1,200.00. 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 Chinese San Francisco, 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, Chinese San Francisco 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.
Studio Number One
The master index records Studio Number One 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 Studio Number One 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 7 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $175.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $114.00 to $899.99. 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 Studio Number One, 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, Studio Number One 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.
Darby
The master index records Darby 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 Darby 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 6 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $562.50, with an observed low-to-high range of $135.00 to $995.00. 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 Darby, 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, Darby 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.
Lesser Gods Eagle
The master index records Lesser Gods Eagle as a 2003 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 Lesser Gods Eagle forms part of the 2003 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 5 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $300.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $100.00 to $2,250.00. 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 Lesser Gods Eagle, 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 2003 yearbook, Lesser Gods Eagle 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.
Sid Jocoy
The master index records Sid Jocoy as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 93, 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 Sid Jocoy forms part of the 2003 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 93 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 $1,500.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $1,500.00 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 Sid Jocoy, 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 2003 yearbook, Sid Jocoy 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.
Marcos Stencil
The master index records Marcos Stencil as a 2003 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 Marcos Stencil forms part of the 2003 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 $490.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $490.00 to $490.00. 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 Marcos Stencil, 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 2003 yearbook, Marcos Stencil 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.
Jay Adams
The master index records Jay Adams as a 2003 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 Jay Adams forms part of the 2003 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 9 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $299.95, with an observed low-to-high range of $150.00 to $550.00. 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 Jay Adams, 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 2003 yearbook, Jay Adams 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.
Fairey Anti-Bush
The master index records Fairey Anti-Bush as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 100, 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 Fairey Anti-Bush forms part of the 2003 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 100 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 $600.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $107.50 to $1,000.00. 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 Fairey Anti-Bush, 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 2003 yearbook, Fairey Anti-Bush 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.
Angela Rough
The master index records Angela Rough as a 2003 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 Angela Rough forms part of the 2003 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 3 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $300.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $300.00 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 Angela Rough, 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 2003 yearbook, Angela Rough 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.
Mao Collage
The master index records Mao Collage as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 70, 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 Mao Collage forms part of the 2003 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 70 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 currently contains no cleaned public-sale observation for this entry under the reporting rules used here. This is a data gap, not a conclusion about scarcity, value, or demand. 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 Mao Collage, 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 2003 yearbook, Mao Collage 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.
Marcos Collage
The master index records Marcos Collage as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 63, 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 Marcos Collage forms part of the 2003 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 63 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 $407.47, with an observed low-to-high range of $407.47 to $407.47. 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 Marcos Collage, 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 2003 yearbook, Marcos Collage 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.
The Beloved Premiere, We Are Blinded By Your Majesty
The master index records The Beloved Premiere, We Are Blinded By Your Majesty as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 60, medium Screen Print, published by MOCA Los Angeles. 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 The Beloved Premiere, We Are Blinded By Your Majesty forms part of the 2003 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 60 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 $250.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $102.50 to $725.00. 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 The Beloved Premiere, We Are Blinded By Your Majesty, 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 2003 yearbook, The Beloved Premiere, We Are Blinded By Your Majesty 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.
Rocka Rolla
The master index records Rocka Rolla as a 2003 release: First Edition, stated edition size 100, 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 Rocka Rolla forms part of the 2003 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 100 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 $450.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $450.00 to $450.00. 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 Rocka Rolla, 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 2003 yearbook, Rocka Rolla 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.
Radicals
The master index records Radicals as a 2003 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 Radicals forms part of the 2003 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 4 cleaned public-sale observations for this entry. Its reported median is $525.00, with an observed low-to-high range of $102.50 to $1,024.00. 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 Radicals, 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 2003 yearbook, Radicals 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 2027 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 27: 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.
