now Im told could be 1982 or 1983 as the collector is now 72 and a Pot head back then. bad memory

Don't need to nail down the year, JUST NEED AUTHENTIC OR NOT OPIONIONS.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 21, 2018 at 11:41am

For new discussion and opinions, why not post a larger, better scan? Right now there is nothing there.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 21, 2018 at 11:51am

After looking at her tax returns, stuff from RecordMecca, GottaHaveItRockandRoll, and The Kuflik Collection from this period C. 1983, this looks to present a different form, general appearance yes but apparently incorrect loops, spatial relations, angles, slants etc. and too legible with odd baseline. I say, at this point, not authentic.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on January 21, 2018 at 11:50am

Need to see the image, please.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by marc e on January 21, 2018 at 12:00pm

in 82 still a knowbody .

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on January 21, 2018 at 12:02pm

Is this still about the Madonna signature? I thought there were some pretty clear opinions near the end of that previous discussion.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on January 21, 2018 at 12:23pm

This shows you another early Madonna signature and the one you are asking about. I think you may be able to see some distinct differences. I hope this is of some help.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Xwiesy on January 21, 2018 at 12:41pm

The first o in “Love” in the first example looks exactly like the “o” in Madonna in the second.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 21, 2018 at 12:49pm

The attack of the "onna" seems opposite in the two examples. Humps vs pointy peaks. Height of things like the "d". I see what you are saying though. The example Joe posted falls in line with the exemplars of Kuflik, Jeff Gold and the others. This op questioned sig still stands apart to me - the content of loops, spatial things and so on. Certainly more examples would be useful.

Re "I don't need to pin down a year" - with such an early graph that might contain unusual features, the date is very important to me as it could explain various seemingly odd traits and lead to finding other examples or information to support a position, one way or another. Like having a 1953 Monroe signature on a menu that is found to be from 1964 or so because there was no sales tax until then, and it in is the menu (as were later-date Flamingo logos). Now, without knowing the date of the menu, it was a 1953 Monroe sig on a Flamingo menu. With the date - it becomes an impossibility with that signing style.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Xwiesy on January 21, 2018 at 12:59pm

First example- the “o” in Madonna resembles others where she takes a line straight above the top of the o.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 21, 2018 at 1:01pm

Yes, I know. I saw that. :)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 21, 2018 at 2:22pm

It is odd this thread is so quiet, and the other so...eventful. This seems to have more relevant discussion...Joe posted a sig...and still crickets...