I recently seen a person get an autograph from NHRA legend John Force at The World Of Wheels in Chicago. He had John sign a photo of them that he just taken of both them together on his IPhone. John didn't know how to sign it, but the guy explained how easy it was to sign. Afterward I ask him how to do it.
He explained, all you do is choose a photo in your photo library. Tape on where you see 3 small lines that has circles on them. Next, Tape on the circle that has 3 dots in it, Tape on the tool box that says "Markup" underneath. Now you can set what color and the width of the autograph that you what on your photo.
So, a couple of days ago, I met The Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and I asked her to sign the IPhone photo that I had of us when I met her a few months pier. The nice person that she is, she was glad to sign with the soft rubber tipped pen that I gave her. I think wanted to sign because she admitted to me that she had never seen that done before.
Not 5 minutes later, I met The Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner, I asked him to do the same, and he was pleased to sign. He to admitted he never seen this before. I think both photos came out rather nice!!!!!
But my question is, in the real world of collecting autographs, Is this considered a real autograph?
I myself am a Picture Proof Photo Autograph collector (Autographs that I take a picture of the person signing the item). I have heard from many collectors that have impressed to me that they don't need to take a photo of the celebrity signing for authenticity because the autograph they received would be going in their own collection which they will never sell it. The only reason I don't take a photo of a person signing an autograph is when that person is signing a photo that I have taken of us together pier to meeting him again and I would not be selling it in the future either. Who would buy it???
I personally like it and can see the possibilities of the IPhone autographs becoming popular because now you can meet a celebrity, take a selfie with him, and now have him autograph it.
Or you can go to an sports event with many photos on your phone of all the stars that will be there, and now you don't even have to carry a big notebook of photos. You don't even have to carry a pen. You can just have them sign with their finger!!!! (but then authenticators would now have to know the loops and hoops of an hand written and an finger written autograph)
And what would be the difference of selling/buying an mail in autograph from an IPhone autograph? People sell reprints of autographs all the time.
I would like to hear you thoughts of The IPhone autographs!!!!
Thank You Very Much!!!!!
FRED (Picture Proof Autographs)
I think you answered your own question right at the end - at best, it would be considered a reprint. I can't imagine there would be much of a market for it.
Yes a Reprint. I think there is money in reprints, just ask all the collector/dealers that buy and sell them, specially to all those mail-in order collectors in rural areas that cant get those autographs in person.
So does anybody authenticate the real autograph before it goes to reprint, or is it a real crap shoot for mail-in autograph collectors when they buy?
I never expect much from TTM generally. But if treated with the same logic and attention as any other graph a collector should be able to weed out secretarials etc. provided there are exemplars, but that would apply to any graph. Preprints should be not much trouble at all in hand, unless you recognize them in which case a scan will suffice.
I see plenty of reprints of terrible forgeries on Ebay, so not really.
I think that is why forgers get the big bucks. You can basically say that almost for any autograph that does not come with any proof of the actual item being signed
I think forgers are often successful because the person buying is not armed as they should be with exemplars, experience and information. Many posts here show this. Newer collectors often cant determine live ink, buy based on stickers etc.
I should not have spoken so broadly. There is a distinction between "preprint" (sent by the celebrity or his rep to please a fan) and "reprint" (copy of copy on eBay for example, made from who knows what) and forgers, generally, focus attention elsewhere (forging).
and that most dealers that sell autographs have general practices of not supplying proof other than their COAs and that the general public that collects autographs has totally accepted it that way.
But what kind of "proof" is going to be available for a Gleason 1950 album page? I mean, apart from the information in the signature, the item signed, etc. Is more needed?
You are right, there is nothing more you can do from autographs from the past.
But I see autographs of today being sold without any proof, today in a world where most everyone has an IPhone and it always make me question what was the person doing while he was getting the autograph that he couldn't get the proof that it was actually real