Views: 262

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It wants to be, but you'd need a better pic...

I’m with Fudd. The photo is small, fuzzy and blurry. 

From what I can see, you may be ok. However, a  clearer picture would help.

My curiosity is peaked.  There is a Mickey mantle collector group on Facebook.  Someone posted this for opinions and about 10 people shot it down.  I feel like it’s not perfect but it still looks good.  I don’t know....I’ve seen a few on the FB that look bad that they all praise and some that look good that they knock.

It looks too roughly signed in this photo to make any reasonable determination. I'll rarely offer an opinion on anything without a decent photo. The one thing that stands out as a warning sign is the left M's left curve. I think it has a chance of being good but without a decent photo any opinion is worthless. 

I apologize. I don't want to prematurely get your hopes up. Steve's right. It is rough. I don't like the Ms, but they're not your typical banana, forgery Ms. I'm confident enough to say, I like the "i c k e y " and the "a n t l e "but with a better picture, we'd be able to give you a more concrete answer. 

need a better quality photo, but I don't like what I see

Agreed.  I don’t love the M’s but I was able to find other examples where he stretched his lines a bit.  Here’s a psa/dna example.

its not the M's, is the fluidity of the signature that appears to be lacking.

You could very well be right. But why opine on something when the poster doesn’t post an image worth commenting on?

Believe me, if I had the auto in hand the image would be crystal clear.  

the fact that the photo is blurry is revealing.


© 2019   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Community Manager.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service