Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by 0daqnwz731p09 on May 10, 2018 at 1:16pm

The masters figured it out a long time ago.  On their own most likely.  Just like you did.  No one on this site is going to "help" them.  

This is the attitude that bothers me about authentication and about this site in general.  It's the attitude that forgers are low IQ dullards who make blatant and obvious mistakes.  Like they're the kind of petty criminals who stick up a 7/11 and scribble signatures on their kitchen table to buy their next hit of drugs or pay their upside down car note.  Sure, 80-90% could be exactly that.  In fact, I mainly browse this forum so I can see all the bad forgeries and the people who get duped by them and get a few laughs in between the mundane workday. 

But what about the elite forgers?  The smart ones?  The ones who have their work authenticated and auctioned off by the top auction houses?  Are the people who say things like "so-and-so's signature is impossible to replicate" actually encouraging the good forgers?

I read somewhere that some forgers aren't motivated by money at all.  Some are already successful and their sole motivation is to make fools of the experts to feed their ego.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on May 10, 2018 at 1:26pm

I'm just going to come out say it....

I've read your comments almost from the beginning and when Steve Zarelli called you out awhile back. And for good reason I might add. 

I don't like you and I certainly don't trust you. You're comments are both naive and asinine and you are of no benefit to this community. 

The re-occuring theme about your comments is that you support forgeries and go against authenticator's

Steve Cyrkin will delete this comment if he deems it unfit.

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on May 10, 2018 at 1:42pm

Seems like you know all the master, elite forgers huh?

Permalink Reply by 0daqnwz731p09 on May 10, 2018 at 1:59pm

Don't have to look far for clues on where they operate.  Ever read "Hauls of Shame?"  Half of the signed lots at most auctions are forgeries, some undetectable. We're talking millions of dollars.  It'll keep getting worse because of "authentication."  

Permalink Reply by goodcat on May 10, 2018 at 10:59am

I'm not sure what you're getting at Appleton

Can you expand on your comment?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on May 10, 2018 at 12:30pm

Yes...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 0daqnwz731p09 on May 10, 2018 at 12:33pm

He believes a certain pen movement and pattern can't be replicated.  Notwithstanding whether or not it's actually possible for a skilled penman to replicate the signature (I think it is), his logic leaves him open to a type of confirmation bias since he's only looking for characteristics not fitting the typical exemplars.  This begs the question.  If a forgery meets the characteristics, will he be able to detect it?  The answer would be no.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on May 10, 2018 at 12:34pm

No one is 100% right. Is that what you wanted me to say? I’m not an expert, nor do I get paid. 

However I believe I have studied this band well enough to know enough traits that would negate most forgeries. There is also a lot of other information that goes into authentication for a particular band or group that the novel person would simply not know

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 0daqnwz731p09 on May 10, 2018 at 1:39pm

I'm not saying anything that others on this forum already think in private. 

The entire autograph authentication industry is a giant racket based on pseudo-science.  It encourages and lines the pockets of a select few forgers who churn out plenty of inventory and who, in turn, make the authenticators wealthy. 

Not to mention that the prices people are paying at auction are in bubble territory and feed the cycle even more.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on May 10, 2018 at 12:25pm

For the very few I would trust on Pink Floyd autographs concerning authenticity, Seamus is at the top of my list. Better than any third party service. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher on May 10, 2018 at 1:12pm

I'm not trying to be critical of Appleton here.  I don't know the person or his/ her motives.  The point that Appleton appears to wish to make is that either a signature was witnessed or it was not.  If not, then any third party opinion about authenticity is a guess, even if a very educated one.  Appleton further points out that if a forger were able to get everything exactly right, it would pass muster with official and unofficial third party authenticators - all of whom would be wrong.  As far as it goes, Appleton is correct on both counts.  I would admit to feeling the same slight frustration when someone begins an authenticity opinion with ".....I'm don't know this artist's signature very well, but I don't like it."  This is not uncommon here and it is useless.  HOWEVER, there are some autograph enthusiasts on this site with particular areas of interest and long experience studying their favorite topic over a long period of time - and who appear to be of solid character and high integrity as people, aside from this hobby.  Seamus is among this group.  I don't think for a moment that he considers himself infallible.  But he is passionate about Pink Floyd, is an honest and smart guy and has earned the respect of many here.  Appleton, respectfully, everyone knows that if you didn't see it signed, authenticity opinions are guesses - that this is more art than science.  But making a point of it here is like proclaiming that the sun will rise tomorrow.  It is true, but not innovative or particularly helpful.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 0daqnwz731p09 on May 10, 2018 at 1:49pm

The obvious.  Yes, that autograph authentication is not even close to 100% accurate.  That it exists because of greed and because of the people who pay thousands of dollars for scribbled sharpie signatures they didn't obtain in person and have no idea where it came from except for someone's "opinion".  So that they can display their trophy and advertise how frivolously they spend their money.  It's part of the uber-materialistic culture we're in.  

It's why I mainly like collecting old letters with signatures of unknown or relatively unknown people.  It's cheaper, more interesting, and you learn about history in the process and the people who lived through it.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page