We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Some time ago I seen a beatles set that had been restored By a professional,they touched up the boys signatures around about 15 percent of the signatures were reworked.
Does anyone have any idea if this is a good idea to have signatures restored and would anyone have any pictures of reworked autographs.
Does it effect the value of the sets or signatures?
Tags:
I don't know if I can blame the restorer, some of the actual restoration work is pretty impressive in the examples. I can also understand someone wanting to remove the dedication (however a dedication doesn't bother me.)
http://www.restorationbyjm.com/view_restoration_work_pg6.php
Am I wrong but he implanted the whole George Harrison cut into the sleeve or did he do an ink transfer? I will never get behind an ink transfer as it still seems like a forgery to me.
EDIT: I guess I didn't see this part: AFTER: The "George Harrison" autograph was fitted to the bottom right corner without being glued down. All signatures remained untouched.
How do you feel about all of this Steve?
I doubt I'd ever want one.
But I think it's that if the piece was labeled with what was done to it, even inconspicuously if labeled in a place people know to look, and represented as restored or assembled when offered for sale, every time it's offered, it's OK.
What do you think, Adam?
I have been thinking about the pro's and con's of this. I have gone back and forth. I have come to the conclusion that if it is going to be done then it absolutely needs to be marked or labeled some way as a restoration piece.
I think more care is put into this then a forgery, so I couldn't put it in the same category. I mean, these people seem so skilled at these ink transfers that I guess if they wanted to they could just be forging instead of putting this much effort into it.
I can understand how someone would want this done and I guess now I wouldn't be as judgemental of someone who did this as long as they promoted it as a restoration/transfer. However, It doesn't interest me personally. I like the history of pieces, that is part of the reason why I even started to collect. I think this kills off the history of the signature, but I don't think John Lennon thought of himself as a historical figure in 1964 and I doubt Paul McCartney could look at his signature from that period and remember if he signed it on a postcard or on a back of an album sleeve.
It all depends on how you collect and your reasoning behind it I suppose. Very interesting topic.
I agree with you about labels, but I think in no way should the removal of signatures be called "restoration" It is in no sense of the word "restoring" anything. Your word "assembled" is better and I think that is what these should be called or recreated. I agree with you about labels, but that is a bit like a lock on a house it only keeps honest people in line. Sadly if "restorers" can put labels on others can take them off and no doubt will. A PSA-DNA type stamp with an individual number would be better although I suspect those having this done would not agree to that. The Genie is out of the bottle and it just creates another thing for collectors to be wary of. I certainly would be questioning sellers of high ticket items carefully about this and "re-inking."
could you link me to his profile I'm curious to see any of his other restoration jobs. Thanks
this- i heard - is the top pro.
http://www.restorationbyjm.com/
examples
http://www.restorationbyjm.com/view_restoration_work_pg5.php
http://www.restorationbyjm.com/view_restoration_work_pg2.php
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments 0 Likes
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service