Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jamie Weringo on September 10, 2017 at 12:25am

These are my last remaining Star Wars pieces.  Again, all help is appreciated.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• 0909170257.jpg, 6.5 MB
• 0909170254a.jpg, 6.3 MB
• 0909170300.jpg, 6.6 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on September 10, 2017 at 5:13am

All 3 of these are nice and early, authentic samples. Comparing these to the items these guys sign today, I think you would be shocked at how their signatures have devolved.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jamie Weringo on September 10, 2017 at 5:31am

I've seen some terrible Mayhews from recent conventions and I understand Bulloch can get shaky at cons, too.  Hadn't heard anything about Warwick Davis' sig degrading, though.  Really glad these seem legit.  As far as authentication goes is there any difference between PSA, JSA, or Beckett or is it just a matter of preference?  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on September 10, 2017 at 6:31am

First things first, I don't see any reason at all to have these authenticated. Save your money and put it towards the costs involved in replacing the pieces you stil want in your collection.

As for Warwick's modern autograph from the last 15 years or so, some are as short as WD, while others may have an extra letter here or there like WkDs .... samples below

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jamie Weringo on September 10, 2017 at 10:38pm

I do see the difference.  I probably won't worry about getting these authenticated unless I decide to sell at some point.  I have some other non Star Wars sigs I've gotten at conventions over the years and I've grown quite fond of the 11x17 (for dual and triple sigs) & 11x14 (single signer) formats.  I'm completely in favor of saving the money, though, as some of the pieces I'm going to looking to pick up won't be cheap.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jamie Weringo on September 24, 2017 at 5:52pm

Ran across these also.  I'm told the Spielberg was in-person, just rushed.  The Oz I'm not sure about.  I know, the dark doesn't help.  All would have been signed about 20 years ago.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• 0924172039.jpg, 5.7 MB
• 0924172040.jpg, 6 MB
• 0924172039a.jpg, 5.7 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on September 24, 2017 at 8:05pm

Jeremy is real, and so is Frank, that was his standard TTM response photo for a long time. So long in fact that after awhile they were sending out printed signatures/stamps on the same image.

Spielberg does seem like a pretty standard signature from him circa the turn of the millennium. 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gijs Wermuth on September 27, 2017 at 12:41pm

Hi everyone,
New here. I really need some help on my Carrie Fisher. I've seen so many different signatures I can't tell anymore.
Does the thicker marker influence the flow of a sig? This isn't the standaard sharpie that I see all the time.
Thanx for your input.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• 20170927_080617.jpg, 3.4 MB
• 20170927_080638.jpg, 2.9 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike T on September 27, 2017 at 1:04pm

I don't like it, see what Pete says. The forgers have gotten pretty good at her signature since she died.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on September 27, 2017 at 1:13pm

I could be wrong, but this signature strikes me as having "too much thinking" in it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike T on September 27, 2017 at 1:18pm

Agreed. Too forced. No natural flow.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on September 27, 2017 at 3:25pm

That signature is a disaster, probably signed at an in-person event other than a show, she was probably standing, walking or under the influence of too many "medications" or maybe not enough.

Lots of issues there,  but still plenty to verify it was her hand.  

Not one I would want or ever buy, but it's her signature.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 23
• 24
• 25
• 26
• 27
• …
• 67
• Next ›
• Page