My New Paul McCartney Has Arrived

Here are highest quality scans of the front and back. I also looked at it with magnifying glass (of my son, so it's not a high quality magnifying glass). To me it looks like real and live ink (although I'm not an expert in deciding weather the ink is real or not). What do you think?

1 member likes this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on January 17, 2020 at 7:19pm

I agree, Adam. Provenance is important, sometimes critical. Stories without solid evidence or documentation aren't reliable provenance.

Provenance used to be a very important part of authenticating until TPAs appeared. Then it became "only the autograph matters." We're always at least a step behind good forgers, so things like photos of the autograph from an auction or dealer catalog from 10-100 years ago help establish the age of the autograph. Those don't prove it's real, but they prove how long the autograph has been around, so you know you're not dealing with a recent forgery.