Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on September 22, 2016 at 10:29am

I don't believe that this is authentic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Jones on September 22, 2016 at 10:30am

Thanks. Anything in particular throwing you off?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on September 22, 2016 at 10:43am

I had seen it before, and have seen a few other bad items from the same seller, including a forged Jim Morrison signature. Many of the signed HITC books contain nice Macca signatures, but the shape of this one looks quite odd.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on September 22, 2016 at 4:07pm

at best this is a highly atypical signature, but I would lean towards fake.  either way, I would not want it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Jones on September 23, 2016 at 12:23am

Thanks!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pauline Berry on November 3, 2016 at 12:15am

If this is inauthentic this nice new looking first edition book has been defaced. A reasonably pricey thing to mess up and devalue. So many nice old photos ruined by fake signatures that I have seen. I am only studying McCartney's signature at the moment, but I see good things in it. Speed and confidence is good. But risky to buy because it is a truncated modern style signature, thus fewer details to find truth/fault with.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 3, 2016 at 10:11am

A number of these books have been defaced with fake signatures. The one in question is still available on Etsy for $500.

Here's a discussion that I started about this book, which you might find interesting:

http://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/high-in-the-clouds-b...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pauline Berry on November 3, 2016 at 3:43pm

Thanks for the link BallroomDays, I am reading through it.

Could you possibly post an example of an inauthentic HITC signing? that would be incredibly useful to me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 3, 2016 at 4:09pm

The six examples posted at the top of the discussion aren't authentic in my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on November 3, 2016 at 10:12am

Agree with Pauline, the autograph looks good with speed and confidence

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pauline Berry on November 3, 2016 at 3:59pm

The more I look at it the more I like it. It is super speedy though, therefore quite a feat for a forger, such confidence.

I also like the underlying shape which follows all the other examples on the other thread linked above, the "l" loop bottom that joins to the M juts down the lowest, just like it should and I see other examples of this stick formation in the "P" quickly going onto a malformed "a" but constructed just the way his other "a"s in Paul are.

I have only done moderate, but recently more intense, study on Paul's sig, Marilyn Monroe is my area of expertise. However, fraudulent signatures have the same problems no matter whose signature it is. Nearly all fakes look "careful". This is completely careless. A forger would have to really invest in a pile of books (what $40 bucks a shot?) to write so fast and confidently in the perfect spot of this page. If this signature was on a sheet of paper in isolation I would be less impressed - it could be the 50th attempt on paper to achieve this.

So IMO, Sir Paul defaced this first Edition book of his with this super speedy, mass produced-on-the-day signing. He probably did a 100 the same day.

So, risky to buy because anyone doing so would have to go through this discussion each time because the characteristics that mark it's authenticity are only lightly touched upon because of the speed. But I do see they are there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 3, 2016 at 4:25pm

Here's another Macca signature from the same seller for comparison:

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page