Hi everyone!

Would appreciate your help with this Bruce Springsteen autograph. Do you think it's good or bad?

Thanks for helping!

Views: 1281


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

That's a good idea and I would have no problem doing that, however this signature sold a long time ago

Less than 2 years ago, and certified in '14? Someone else has apparently wondered if the blue canvas PSA/DNA signature is even genuine.

2 years ago, its a little tricky to conact a seller after all this time. What's he  going to tell me? I Can imagine it would go something like this- I sold that two years ago, it was certified and have a nice day. I wouldn't learn anything I don't already know.

Do you realize how large the blue signature is with the length of the canvas being 44 inches. Its huge!


I misunderstand perhaps, I am saying inform the auction house that sold the large blue signed canvas. Who had that huge item and the technology needed is also an interesting if unrelated question. Like a certain "preprint".

Current owner would be a better option for contact
Is there something that leads you to think the signed canvas is not real?

"After all this discussion I would have to say that the blue Springsteen signature on canvas would be something I would stay away from as well." - last post in this thread  (right now) by Robert. That is all.  

Thanks Mr. Steffman. Insomnia, that canvas texture, and no other options - Jan had about 14 hours until auction time. Also dead luck obviously, thankfully the forger was lazy.

One can easily imagine a database with say, Hendrix signatures, all of known dates and with inscriptions, that can be interchanged and re-arranged by some program to appear as a new combination appropriate to a particular month or whatever, even to the type of paper or photo etc. The skill will be recognizing the deposit of "ink" I suppose, knowing what these new printed things are, how they are made, along with the recognition of particular autographs by eye as here and in other threads such as Hendrix threads by Ballroom and others I think. In coins its like recognizing a retoned/resurfaced or "worked" coin by its individual hits and strike arrangements from a previous auction image. 

Here is a recent example, on the left, of a signature being transferred - fortunately the seller was stupid enough to show both in his auction! And again, there is something obviously wrong with the ink deposit. The trails off seem to be a key. In the Springsteen it showed the wrong texture. Here with this "Bowie" they also look odd, as do the breaks (same with the fake "Boss" sig).

Unfortunately, I have seen a few collectors and some dealers not be able to, or claim not to be able to, determine the presence live ink. This coupled with buying from scans and opinions online...

In many cases, it does remain true that a copy of a signature cannot be determined online.

If someone removes a signature (with a bad selection) from one item and applies it to another, your analysis is absolutely great and methods extremely useful. In the case of the Bruce and Bowie, you killed them!

In many cases though, I have seen preprint sellers simply printing the same original scan over and over, and no signature is ever selected or moved at all. It's just a high res scan of an original autographed photo being printed out, so all of the original ink characteristics remain the same.

When I made my quick statement about preprints 2 nights ago (when we were both experiencing insomnia), that's just what I was referring to. And the fact that what was originally offered was a small sized, low res, blurry scan to analyze.



  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2009-2017   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Community Manager.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service