Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 1:06pm

Damats,

These are images comparing the signatures you posted to what they actually look like:

Why did you alter the images like that so they looked like lousy prints?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 1:15pm

In fact, look at the tear in the "k" of York below the Lennon autograph you posted and surrounding areas, and how the top of the lower Lennon touches the edges. They don't appear to be "signed" on the same album.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Damats on February 17, 2019 at 1:31pm

the one i sent was on an angle, but as you can see from the link, they're from the same album 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 1:38pm

Actually, look at the "N" of New York, and you'll see different imperfections in the ink. 

Damats, you discovered a completely copied forgery of Louise Harrison's MTB! Where did you photograph it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 1:47pm

Damats,

I just realized: You probably didn't alter the photo. You took a photo of a fraudulent, printed version of the album. That's why the signatures and text are in exactly the same ink!

You've got to tell us where you photographed it. You posted images from a six-figure forgery.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Damats on February 17, 2019 at 2:58pm

Steve

no forgery me just being the amateur that I am. I printed it out thinking that I could see a difference with a close up from my phone, good eye though!

It's just frustrating that I bought an expensive piece from a trusted seller that may or may not be authentic. Unfortunately for me, there was not much on the internet like there is today. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 3:36pm

Damats,

It’s more than that. Where and when did you photograph the album?

You said that you didn’t have the full photo of the album because you cropped it for the individual signatures. But if you printed it out first and cropped from there, you didn’t lose it! You only cropped a copy of what you photographed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on February 17, 2019 at 3:38pm

I told you that it appears to be a known forgery style. This was before you mentioned that it was purchased from Antiquities. The forgery style I was referring to is associated with Antiquities. Again, if it was real I wouldn’t have had any idea where it was from.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul on February 17, 2019 at 1:18pm

not real

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 17, 2019 at 4:02pm

Moderator's note: I wouldn't put anything past Antiquities, but please don't take as fact that the Beatles autographs in the original post came from them yet. I don't have a doubt in the world that they're forgeries, but because the facts regarding the MTB album don't make sense yet, we can't be sure that the set in the OP is from them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 18, 2019 at 12:44am

Hi Damats,

When I asked how the 'Meet the Beatles" back cover came out rough, over-enhanced, and with the text and autographs all the same shade of black, you said it was because you printed it out to enlarge them, took photos of it and cropped them.

But the set of Beatles in the OP doesn't look like that; it looks nice and flowing, and the set image is about as big as the MTB image.

Why did they come out differently?

Also, I asked you to send me the full photo of the album you cropped the signatures from, and you said that when you cropped it you lost the full album cover image.

The first confusing thing is that when you crop, each crop deletes everything but the cropped area unless you save the cropped area as a new name and then revert the original full photo. So that doesn't make sense to me because you would have not gotten more than one cropped image saved before you lost the full album.

The other confusing thing is that if you printed out the image from the photo you took and cropped the print, you still have the original photo you made the print from. So why can't you post the full image?

Something else confusing to me is that based on the paper used in the crop of the Lennon above and the tears in the paper at right, how it tore, and the feathering of the edges of the paper, it does not look like it's printed on laser printer paper, copy paper or inkjet paper to me. The actual album does not have those tears. It looks like it's printed on some older paper stock, perhaps the kind used to print uncoated stock album back covers. I'm anything but knowledgeable and experienced at album construction and the paper used, but I have learned over time how to identify older and some different kinds of paper.

The album cover you photographed and cropped also doesn't look inkjet or laser printed. It looks more like offset printing to me, but I may be wrong.

While it's easy for most autograph collectors to tell that the autographs on the cover are prints; not original ones signed by the Beatles, others not experienced might not realize that.

As Mark Saunders pointed out (I didn't realize it), what you posted is a copy of Louise Harrison's band-signed and inscribed "Meet the Beatles" album. The original sold for $115,000 in 2005. I would not be surprised if it would bring 2-3 times that today. So we need to know the where and when you photographed it, and who had it, so we can hopefully prevent someone getting really burned if it's an actual copy. 

If you don't want to fill us in publicly, please email me privately at steve.cyrkin@autographmagazine.com. 

Thanks,

Steve

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on February 18, 2019 at 2:39pm

Very odd indeed!!!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page