We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Looking for some thoughts on this set of Rolling Stones autographs that came out of someone's autograph book. They are dated 10.5.63, so that's probably May instead of October, assuming they originated in the UK. I don't think I've ever seen such an early set of their signatures, so while the Keith signature for instance doesn't look like how his signature evolved, I don't really know how he may have signed so early in his career, or why that one out of all of them would be personalized if it was signed by someone else. Anyway, appreciate the feedback!

Views: 981

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Is that referring to mine, or the ones you just posted?

The ones I’ve just posted.

Some more authentic 63 autographs but later on in July and on wards look at the evolution, them that I posted earlier were the only ones from June or pre.

Yes is real the set in the post...

Thanks, so would you recommend that I move ahead with a restoration/conservation? It would cost $500-1000 USD.

I wouldn’t have anything restored it is what it is. 

I totally agree. Tape marks and stains are part of an item's history, like the patina on vintage wooden furniture and bronzes. Perhaps very light restoration (e.g. flattening out creases or removing excess surface dirt) is OK but otherwise I would only restore where it is necessary to protect the item (e.g, removing tape or glue on the reverse that might cause staining to the front). You also have to think about the market value of an item when considering whether, and to what extent, to restore.

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service