Authenticity is Everything
Has anyone tried this Verimarx Ai tool that's advertised on this site?
Was wondering if anyone here has used it here and had it work well? I can't find much information on this tool, supposedly it detects forgeries, just wanted thoughts on it.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by JK
-
Thanks for the background information.
In regard to your comment that it compares by using "known authentic representations where applicable", where are those coming from?
-
-
Quite frankly....from you. As well as sources that are open and available. Also, the comparative analysis has proven far less valuable and accurate than the forgery indicators.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo
-
It would be interesting and useful to see some examples of your Jackie Gleason exemplars through the years 1945 to 1985.
-
-
It might be more informative for you to try one that you have or have access to. I think you would find the analysis interesting.
-
-
I have 57 authentic exemplars posted here from 1936 to the 80's. I was curious to see what you are using for exemplars.
-
-
I would recommend running 3 to 5 examples from different errors through the application to see what the analysis suggests. It should tell you if it’s an adequate exemplars to compare against
-
-
One way street? I want to see what you are using. I believe I know what I am doing with Gleason in each era. You can't post any of your exemplars? But you want me to submit mine?
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin
-
Why don't you submit 5-10 a day? That'll get them into the database it learns and recognizes trends from.
-
-
If the thing is reading this site my exemplars are already posted. I gave a link. I am curious to see what Verimarx is using, particularly in the final secretarial phase which represents the majority of what is out there certified as authentic. PSA still gets them wrong - and right too. The Honeymooner's Facts Page still contains more secretarials and forgeries than authentic examples.
-
-
So when someone submits an autograph for analysis that goes into the database as an exemplar?
Yikes.
-
-
In my original post on this thread I expressed some skepticism that the AI might just be pulling exemplars of all kinds (real and fake) from the internet to use for comparison, and you insisted that it does not work that way.
But when I then asked where you get the exemplars for comparison you replied: "Quite frankly....from you. As well as sources that are open and available." Isn't that sort of the same thing that I mentioned previously?
It seems that you are not using a database of established authentic examples. So, are you scouring the internet for examples to use for comparison? How do you separate the good from the bad when you harvest the examples?
These are just honest questions about the process, since I still don't feel confident about the source of the exemplars.
-
-
You raise a fair question, and I understand why you want clarity on the source material and how the system learns.
To be clear, VeriMarx is not simply pulling random real and fake examples from the internet and treating them all as valid exemplars for direct comparison. When I referred to user-submitted material and open sources, I was not suggesting that every publicly available image is accepted at face value or used as an automatic authentic reference. That would obviously create a major quality-control problem.
A more accurate way to describe it is that VeriMarx can incorporate user-submitted material, along with certain open and available source material, as part of a broader analytical process. Those inputs are not blindly accepted as authoritative. They are assessed, filtered, weighted, and evaluated for consistency and reliability before being given analytical value. So no, that is not the same as indiscriminately scouring the internet and relying on whatever happens to be out there.
At the same time, yes, VeriMarx does retain submitted autograph images so the system can continue to learn and improve over time. That is not materially different from what third-party authenticators do when they retain prior submissions, exemplars, notes, and comparison files as part of developing internal reference material and informing future evaluations.
The important distinction is not simply whether prior images are kept. The important issue is how source material is evaluated and used. Retaining submitted images for learning purposes is very different from blindly harvesting random online images and treating them as trusted exemplars.
I also want to be careful not to overstate or over-disclose proprietary details about exactly how VeriMarx ranks, filters, and weights source material, because that gets into internal methodology. But your concern is a legitimate one: source quality matters enormously in authentication, and separating stronger material from weaker material is a core part of the process.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Sign up for our Newsletter!
Photos
© 2026 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
