I don´t know if we have already had this discussion, sorry if yes.
There was signing session before a gig in 1968 in switzerland:
One of this lovley pieces was sold in ebay in November, but unfortunatly I missed it, I would have bought it for that price...
If there is interest I can try to translate the website essentially in the next days.
What is that "Roger" writing? :D
Should these loops and negative spaces in the Waters ending flourish and the Gilmour ending flourish (above "Atronomy Domine") match...perfectly at the "tightest" spot in overlay (rotation was necessary and a touch of scale)? This is the first item shown the one offered. It is dark there, but that's a match to me. The tiny blue scribble at the right of the Waters - S.B.....? Hmmm. Interesting, perhaps even auspicious letters to be there, and described at "unidentified" but with all that gig detailed gig data. It's odd. Just food for thought.
Maybe David signed for Roger, in this case???
Gilmour was in the band now...so he signed the current album. In the text, one recipient does not want Gilmours signature...but he worry about it, when the band was succesful...
Yes, Rogers signature is a little bit strange in this case. Text said, they still practiced...
Seller said, there are 2 unknown signatures.
Yes, I know what the auctions says. It seems odd to me - what do those letters "S.B....." there suggest to you? I have yet to see these kind of observations re the loops and negative spaces lead anywhere good - perhaps this time. It appears no feedback was left in either direction FWIW.
I have little doubt these are all authentic. That's how they signed back then and it's easy to see the letter formations that resemble later years
Well, "definitely" to "little doubt" in under an hour makes me look even more. Looking forward to learning more and seeing who else says what.
Don't overthink my response
Its just a way of saying things
Shall I go back to "definitely" again so you don't get confused?
Or maybe I should have said "no doubt"
Look into it all you want
They are authentic
Don't misinterpret me Shawn. I am not confused, I am asking questions. :)
We are here to look into things - I am. But Shawn, I have not said they aren't authentic - you have twice suggested it - here and below a few posts. I was just asking reasonable questions - such as why do those loops do what they do when superimposed - something that jumped out at me in under a minute (that they are the exact same yet slightly different scale is perhaps even more disturbing to me)? Why the very low price and single bidder/no competition? Why the "S.B.."? Why no feedback left in either direction? Why two different pens for a single signing (FWIW) ? Why all that detailed gig data yet no mention of the "S.B..." with its obvious suggested ramifications other than "unknown signatures"? Are these "...how they signed back then...", or indeed highly atypical as has been mentioned and which I agree from what I have seen? Does anyone else think Gilmour signed for Waters as Andreas suggested? I would want to try and answer these questions, and maybe a few more. What do other 1968 examples look like in terms of size relations of names etc?
Well, how do you account for those loops and spaces? Even the trajectories. And that "SB" - someone else with those 2 initials signed this and the mere speculation is not mentioned considering the potential implications, but all that other detailed data is? Seems ideal. It would be good to post exemplars from this time period - what I have is not really helping much.