Authenticity is Everything
Greta Garbo autograph on photo
What is your opinion on this Greta Garbo signed photo?
Greta Garbo signed photos from the 1950s or 1960s must be almost non-existing apart from this excellent piece.
Does anyone know the year of the Clarence Sinclair Bull photo?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by MovieHeavenAutographs on
-
It is apparent that the following signatures are written with the same hand.
The first is from the photo above and the others are from checks and other official documents.
Please, click on the picture to compare:
-
-
In addition, bear in mind that the signature of the photo is significantly larger than those on the checks and also written slightly inclining.
-
Permalink Reply by eddy on
-
This is helpful to see some further inconsistencies.
- "slant" is one of the characteristics PSA often points out. Look at the left-leaning slant of the "a" in the photo signature compared to the more upright on the checks and documents.
- Why is that "bo" down a slant ascent? It's flat in every check/doc shown.
- See the comparatively wide space between the "G" and "a" in the surname as well on the photo signature as opposed to the lack of one on the checks and docs.
- Still don't like those artistic downstrokes on the horizontal lines of the photo signature or that paused and hooked downward "G" on her first name.
Sorry. I just can't get behind this. The more I look at it, the more it seems off. Really off, imho.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
Good morning Eddy,
I was typing and correcting (too many) typos while you were typing. It seems we are seeing many of the same things in that composite.
-
-
👍 Yep, that does seem to be the case that we're seeing some of the same things.
Interestingly, I shared the link to the RR piece with a fellow Garbo enthusiast last night. Right away they came back with the observation I shared up thread about never having encountered an example of an uninscribed photo with her name alone.
Adding that to the other anomalies, I agree with you that this is one to pass on.
I'm disappointed in the fact that it was allowed through and that PSA will provide an LOA to the winning bidder for an additional $150 if so desired. Insult upon injury.
-
-
That is very interesting regarding the inscriptions. I of course defer to you and your friend with those observations.
I was having a look in my preferred fashion at the composite. I believe Poirot might say "...it is the little sore thumb I think, mon ami..."
-
-
Indeed. From what I was just reading uninscribed signed Garbo photographs are extremely rare and the couple that exist date to around 1927. I do not know if all agree those are authentic but they have surfaced at auction in the past. I got the impression uninscribed signed Garbo photographs are something one would not expect to see.
-
-
Were the 1927 ones from the exhibitor convention that MGM hosted that year? A very different animal as a signed photo. I don't think she, nor any of the MGM stars of that time, had a choice but to sign these to be given out as souvenirs to the attendees. 😉
-
-
Thank you for showing that. The articles did not stipulate but mentioned "about two" so considering the year I might guess so.
-
-
"about two" sounds about right. History For Sale and Leading Lights Autographs had (have) both had one. Another AL member and I have both longed for them for years!
-
-
-
May I ask your opinion about the Garbo signatures below?
-
-
Thank you for gathering, preparing and posting the scaled exemplars. I'm really not sure it will yield the results you may expect. We will see.
Perhaps. There are some differences in baseline, certain slants, negative spaces and heights, some forms already mentioned IIRC and obviously that spacing. Of those you posted your example is the only one that does not exhibit such expressive variance in stroke width as well. It seems lifeless next to the others. But those are just my observations from the few exemplars you've shown. Did you have dates for each of those? The inclusion of that information may have proven quite useful.
To my point and as I've asked in past threads- "OK, it's authentic. But is it attractive?" The market places a lot of weight on eye appeal. Let's say that signature is good. That presumption would still leave the terminal contrast issues, the severe cropping (most likely done by by the publicity department of the studio), and the condition problems.
Pass for me instantly on eye appeal; the signature is rendered tertiary by the unfortunate ink contrast and the overt contrast of the cropped possible copy print which strays from the original intent of the artist and removes value, to me. It is a problem piece IMO with that eye appeal and a hard sell, which I think we just saw at RR three days ago. It brought just 30% of the estimate or so? The only thing that could make this worse, to me, is the addition of one of those stickers on the front - the resulting contrast between sticker and dark image would blow the faint signature into the sunset, whatever its origin.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
