We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Authenticity is Everything
A, B, and C Quality: A Topic for Discussion but...Rarely Discussed!!
Hi All,
In coins, all MS65's are clearly not equal. There are many qualities that dictate or influence value apart from technical grade and authenticity. Let's apply this to SP's...
For discussion, consideration - a topic that doesn't come up a lot. Authentic - OK. But is it NICE?
Brother thread "On the qualities on an autograph"
I tried to select some more or less equivalent Bowie SP's and assign them quality ratings (NOT grades) for comparison - A to D with "+'s" and even "-'s". This is a trial post - add/change/suggest - please! I feel this area is lacking in development. An alarming number of my collector friends are paying well over lab photo prices for grainy 11x14 2nd gen pc prints and magazine pages with rushed or poor or problem signatures with a lack of qualities and contrast issues and I am trying to quantify this in some way to address it. And, yes, many ways to skin a cat. ;) And no, this does not address scarcity (understanding vintage is often preferable), just some aspects of quality. The more tangible ones to start. Maybe I am going about this the wrong way (!) - open to all suggestions. So many variables...
A, B, & C
A+: Vintage Official original 1976 release 11x14 (large) lobby card with full release and studio data, compelling/classic image from famous film, complimentary ink color, great placement and very decent contrast, with smooth beautiful very vintage signature. Would an inscription be better? To me, yes! More is more! (Note: this is actually printed backward, often a problem, but the image is so strong and the many other qualities more than compensate!).
A (strong): Good promotional label/studio marked 1st gen 8x10 lab photo still (look how crisp), b/w yes but © and with label info, sharp borders, awesome image, engaging and with superb contrast and placement. Pretty strong with almost full signature - some minor fuzziness. A lab photo has an inherent quality a magazine photo or news clipping does NOT. They are made to throw away, like many adverts. One lasts about a century with decent ink and care - guess which?
B+ (just): Strong image. Vintage classic Ziggy, possibly Official vintage photo (looks 2nd gen from flat contrast), candid pose (good in some cases, great here as this is The 1980 Floor Show (added desirability) - final Ziggy late '73), unmarked though, large reasonable signature at typical slant, fair contrast at best. The vintage photo, signature, composition (great photo) and Ziggy image make this a B+.
B (strong): Unknown "pop" period image, grainy, strong signature and placement, but contrast a bit impaired by the design behind it - too busy and distracting. Mediocre image. Were this a 70's image it would fare much better. Technically this overtakes the one below on at least two counts, but I'd choose the vintage Official 1978/79 promo that follows even with its contrast challenges. If an Official photo, perhaps a B+.
B: Classic period/awesome pose but quite poor contrast (black on black) and placement, Not the best photo to get signed - something to think about when selecting. True, it is an Official promo with label markings, but overall not greatly remarkable apart from vintage signature and quality 1st gen image with photographers name/label etc. It's a great B. Not a C+ because it is an Official label promo photo and a great image - I'd take it any day over the B(strong) above.
C-: Probably unofficial (likely 2nd gen photo or less from tight odd crop and slight softness), unmarked, printed backwards, less than stellar contrast/placement, messy signature, uncompelling image, thumbtack hole.
C-/D (Damaged): Newspaper cut/clipping, poor/stained condition (ripped/taped), a bit of scarce handwriting but not enough to overcome obstacles. Newspaper not permanent and will yellow/crumble. Folds and worn creases also often come into play in these cases.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Paul on
-
I can agree on the start of the post, with people over paying for, well over lab photo and 2nd gen prints.
magazine pages etc It is an issue, that's why i try to avoid them.
If im not wrong ebay is flooded with them, Eric?
Ill go through the rest of the post shortly.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
Thanks Paul! All input most appreciated. This can't be an exact science, many of course will disagree with this B+ or that B- etc., but it is the discourse and raising of these many issues I am after.
-
-
I agree on the last one c-d that should bring the cheapest amount of money, What is a second gen, meaning not from the original negative?
Ive seen signed Stones magazine foldouts with poor contrast in the d, category but it was priced accordingly, then you see other fold outs and they maybe asking too much.
-
-
Hi Paul,
Exactly A second generation photo would be a photo made from a photo. Third generation is a copy of a copy etc. An example would be this which I made to highlight the differences - it is just a sample. Some copy photos will have the credits etc and not be cropped - in that case one looks for extreme sharpness, depth, crispness (eyelashes etc), even the paper can help making the judgement. Side by side it is obvious. As with all of this, it is acquired. Click for full image.
-
-
Here is another way to overpay. This is a detail of an 8x10 being sold in excess of the full-on value of a lab quality chemical photograph with all the papers, bells and whistles - just no mention it is a cheap computer print you can probably see through and will likely fade in under 5 years. Is it a photo? In A way. If the return policy is for authentic only - you have no case. In this case the poor contrast, lack of any detail and obvious speckle indicate the nature of the "photo".
Computer print:
-
-
Here is a good way to help distinguish first generation photographs from later copies when evaluating online scans. Sometimes the surface the photo is resting on can reveal similar information (is it sharper than the photo?). Look at how sharp the signature and ink is compared with the image in this detail. This is likely a lab photo, but not from the negative. The full image has been cropped - the original Sound and Vision 1990 promotional image is very sharp indeed, and has photographers credit and label info etc.
-
-
Hi again,
Here are three LP's (one is a CD and one is a 45 I think - but play along). How would you arrange these in terms of "A, B, and C" qualities in terms of placement, contrast etc?
Click for full image:
-
Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on
-
I am doing this based entirely on my own tastes in autograph quality. I like clear and bold with little or no faint spots. I also try to avoid autographs in "busy" areas of a photograph. So for me, if I were buying I would go A-C-B. I am completely disregarding the dates and making an assumption they are all of the same scarcity.
-
-
Hi Scott,
Thanks! I came up with B,C,A. Changes has some contrast challenges but is very nice if a compilation (slight odd vertical stroke in sig after date), Let's Talk really has some contrast problems and Aladdin Sane seems rather ideal placement and contrast to me with a beautiful full signature. Yes, scarcity and dates aside for these LP's although in the previous examples vintage/Official products have influence, first generation photos preferred etc. Many ways to skin that cat! Thanks!
-
-
-
Hi Eric. I wasn't sure but what the line at the end of the name was part of his signature. For placement and background, I agree with your "A." It is a matter of taste to some extent. I personally absolutely love blue ball point and the 50s-60s turquoise or, green fountain pen so that comes into play in my decisions. I have many times made choices based on those two ink colors. It is like modern "Sharpies" I personally prefer blue to black.
-
-
-
Hi Scott,
"...wasn't sure but what the line at the end of the name was part of his signature."
That is why I noted "odd" and "after" - that stroke is "always" before - it is an apostrophe (correct word?) for the date. Thanks for adding! :)
I also LOVE emerald green fountain fro the 30's! I, like Bowie, hate Blue Sharpies LOL
Blog Posts
Gold & Pawn Trading Center Sells Forged Mickey Mantle Photo COA GFA
Posted by CJCollector on November 27, 2024 at 2:23pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Ebay Seller Smpsportscards Sells Forged Counterfeit Willie Mays 1996-97 Topps Autograph Card
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
COA CSA Authentic Forged Babe Ruth Cut Autograph Laughable
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Photos
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
