We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Is this Eric Clapton autograph real?
Hi Everyone...
Is this Eric Clapton autograph real? Thanks for your opinions
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joe W. on
-
I'm no where close to being an authenticator nor an expert in Clapton. This is one that looks OK but I am not completely comfortable with it based on the ones I have owned and others I've seen over the years. It's close enough that I would not call it bad either. If I had to take a side, I would say it's good. With that said, I would not want to own it.
The problem I am beginning to see is, with all the technology today we may be getting too narrow with our opinions of what is genuine or not. Human signatures are not fingerprints but unique. Many factors impact them including type of writing utensil, temperament, and situational.
-
Permalink Reply by Mr. Steffman on
-
Good point. My assumption was that it's a good forgery, but the factors I noticed that are clearly wrong about it could be caused by the small cd cover surface or the fact that he signed near the edge etc. I figured not though, since my authentic pool includes so many samples from such a variety of surfaces and none of them do what this signature does.
But who knows. I try to be conservative when it comes to heavily forged, highly valuable, minimal signatures like Clapton. The ratio of forged Claptons to real ones alone is also a statistic I always keep in mind.
If this item comes with documentation from his charity and especially if other authentic claptons exist with the factors stated, I'm always happy to expand my authentic pool to include new scans and new variations.
Until then, I still say it's wrong.
-
-
Mr. Steffman. Not wanting to stray to far off topic here but would like to get your thoughts on this McCartney. It's one that seems to be "on the border" and opinions are evenly divided.
https://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/paul-mccartney-auto...
Appreciate your consideration.
-
-
I wouldn't pass that one.
I haven't seen a P like that, and the space between the l (in Paul) and M (in McCartney) is bigger/wider than preferred. Also, seems to be some slowness in spots.
Overall, it has a ton of things I look for. I'd still lean toward skilled forgery.
Does it have a story? There's too many near-flawless fake Macca on the market with zero provenance. And also too many awful-but-genuine Macca that no one would believe are real.
-
-
It does have a "story" which is given in the discussion if you follow the link to the original discussion. Of course, stories may help but they go only so far.
BTW, I have a number of these "borderline" autographs. Most obtained from great sources.
And, I respect Roger Epperson very much although I've seen his opinions get debunked as well. We are all only human.
-
Permalink Reply by Thurston bell on
-
Roger will settle this for you amateurs and his coa means something!!
-
-
Thank god we dont have to put up with the arrogance!
-
Permalink Reply by KatoTheMaster on
-
I was informed that the Eric Clapton graph was obtained inperson from his home. I know of the seller great guy highly respected inperson autograph collector in the UK. Most of my items come from him.
-
Permalink Reply by goodcat on
-
Nice one Kato
Do you have an explanation about it being signed twice?
Both sigs are authentic IMO
-
-
Nice. Would you mind sharing his name?
-
-
I've obtained Paul in person well over 100 times myself during 3 different tours on every item type imaginable. I remember seeing Roger in Texas. I respect his opinion and that's why we've asked him to consult on vintage music for AutographCOA.com.
Labelling people you don't know as amateurs is foolish and rude.
-
-
Autocoas only sumise like the Tarantino graph, ffs!
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
