We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks. 

Hi guys, what are your opinions on this programme. The signatures look good to me, and don't appear to be Aspinalls.

Any thoughts are much appreciated.


Thanks

Lewis

Views: 611

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They look good to me too. Nice!

Thanks for the quick reply!

I am going to need some convincing on these.  I can't see the Ringo, the Lennon is very light and the Harrison really bothers me. but the thing that bothers me the most is something on the Lennon that is normally a dead giveaway for a forgery. Just not sure.

they are probably real, but not a slam dunk

Interesting. The Lennon is indeed light, but I don't see any problems aside from the "a" in "Starr" looking a bit odd. What don't you like about the George?

Hi Ballroom. I admit that I am sometimes too conservative in my opinions.  what bothers me about the Harrison is the formation of the second g.  I know this is nit-picking but in virtually all of his signatures he was pretty consistent with the counter clockwise motion forming the upper part of the g, similar to Joe Dimaggio.  this one is not like that.  In the Lennon, it is very unusual for him to have his L starting from the left, as he had just finished writing the John.  In most cases, the top of the L actually starts from the right.  The Paul bothers me a little with the relative size of the "aul".  In his older sigs from the early 60's, I dont remember seeing that drastic a difference in size between the a and u, and the "l" appears too big. Again, these are probably nit-picking points but that is why I probably would not want to own it, even if is real. and it very well could be.

Hi Terrier. Well, I'm not sure that you can be too conservative when it comes to the Beatles. I know what you mean about the second "G" in "George" and the "L" in "Lennon". While it certainly isn't the norm, I have seen other authentic examples in which those letters appeared the same way. I've also seen the same thing with the "au" in "Paul" but, again, definitely not the norm.

thats what makes the Beatles so challenging, because they are so highly forged.  most of the forgeries are rubbish, but I have seen some ones that are very close. its fine to have abnormal signatures, it happens all the time. I just get suspicious when each signature on one document has the exception.  but if I were to have to render an opinion, I would say they are probably real. 

The autographs looks great to me, but if you're thinking of buying you need an expert's opinion, and I'm not. Post the link on Roger Epperson's profile, asking if he'd be kind enough to comment, or go to his site, www.rogerepperson.com and get an official online opinion for $15.

Thanks for all the replies. Beatles autos certainly are a mine field. I'll try Roger.

Some closer pics of the Lennon

Attachments: No photo uploads here

the lennon looks good, the only thing that bothers me is the way he started the "L". its from the wrong side. but its probably just one of his "exceptions".  overall the signatures look good, but there is something in each one of them that I presented above, that makes me pause.

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service