Tags:
Good topic. Hmm. I recognize that cover because I handled one signed by Gleason in 1967. On the wine list. Nice Liza adverts etc. Now, one could say displaying the wine list would be difficult to display, so cut it out (the page, not the signature!). In this case, the signature is or was on the cover so context/date/"texture" is lost. I agree re last resort notion. Also, w/o the context the color and other partial imagery on the "cut" becomes much more distracting IMO. To me more is ...more.
Eric
Buying an autograph is part of the parcel to know roughly where it was signed, as a collector that is. On the other hand people (dealers) want to make as much money as they possibly can and they don't seem to care if they cut something into pieces. It's all about the slabbed coa.
It depends on the significance of the document or item the signature is on. Anyone who collects or deals with autographs should keep the importance factor in mind. There is a time and place for everything. Just to cut up a piece to be slabbed for resell is not a good idea in general.
With the Beatles it's all about subject matter historical importance that really can increase the value of the signatures.
One could argue contrast as well as the obvious context has been severely hampered. It has literally has been reduced and not just in size.
Eric
This is another way PSA is screwing up the hobby as much as helping it. Stupid collectors want their magic wand so badly that they'll deface items for it.
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service