Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on November 30, 2011 at 9:21am

I will say that the McCartney is definitely not real, in fact, its a pretty bad attempt.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stipe on November 30, 2011 at 10:06am

this is an authenticated McCartney/Jackson piece I saw on the eBay.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on November 30, 2011 at 10:09am

ive seen this one before.  the McCartney is good on this one.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lars Olav Karlsen on November 30, 2011 at 10:29am

Why on earth would anybody put a sticker on the froth cover of an authentic signed record? I would never have bought that :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on November 30, 2011 at 10:51am

I agree. I never like that either for high-end pieces. I want authentication stickers on either the back or just affixed to the LOA.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 30, 2011 at 11:22am

Hi Lars,

Could you please upload a smaller version of your image, 800-1000 pixels in width and saved as a JPG? I had to delete yours because it was over 25 megs--beautiful but too big for people to download on mobile devices or slower connections. In the size I suggest, it will be easy to authenticate from but will be less than 200K...which anyone can download in seconds. 

I would do it, but I'm on my phone. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks,

Steve

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lars Olav Karlsen on November 30, 2011 at 1:51pm

oh sorry Steve - it was only 4 mb on my computer but I guess something happened on the way to the net :)

I have uploaded a new one as a link.

If anybody else has any opinion please let me know, I think it would help if the Jackson one is real - but I guess the chance is next to none if the McCartney are bad :/

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 30, 2011 at 2:04pm

My phone said it failed after 25 megs, so it must have tried to download it several times. Thanks for the smaller file. In my opinion neither one is genuine, and the McCartney particularly is very poor forgery. Sorry...wish I had better news.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lars Olav Karlsen on November 30, 2011 at 2:32pm

Thanks a lot for your opinion - I would rather know that something is fake then go around with a false pretense.

But of cause - it would be so much more fun if it was real.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 30, 2011 at 3:46pm

It's really sad, because such a high percentage are forgeries. Can your friend get refund?

BTW, while the McCartney was obviously bad at first glance, the MJ was not. What gives the Michael Jackson away the most is that it's slowly signed; drawn if not traced. You can see a lot of wavering in areas that would be smooth if he actually signed it. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on November 30, 2011 at 4:06pm

Steve, I wasn't sure about the Jackson, it had some positives, but the Mcc was pathetic.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 30, 2011 at 5:54pm

Terrier,

I agree, I think there were some real positives on Michael Jackson. The most obvious signs of forgery to me were the stop as he started the upstroke of the M, the slight shift on the downstroke of the M and the significant one on the downstroke of the J. The stop most of all, since I can't imagine him ever doing that:

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page