Thoughts on this Frank Sinatra signature?

I think this looks legit and probably late 1940’s, but appreciate any thoughts! Thanks in advance!

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 19, 2022 at 4:47pm

Looks fine to me.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on October 19, 2022 at 5:45pm

Thanks!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 19, 2022 at 6:00pm

Most welcome. I'm sold on the "F", the "k" like an "h" and the "Sinatra". Late 40's?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on October 19, 2022 at 6:10pm

I agree. And I’m thinking maybe somewhere between 1945-1950

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eddy on October 19, 2022 at 7:05pm

Hi Patrick -

I'm going to nitpick on this a bit.

That ink is VERY blue for being 70+ years old. Often the steel tip blues of that era have aged to look more like dark bluish/almost black. It's really thick and even.

There's been some slight damage to the paper around the "F"...but the ink looks like it may have been written over the trail. The first "a" in "Sinatra" usually has it being formed by coming from the bottom and looping up. I'd also like the last "a" of his surname to not be as closed at the top and to just drop straight down rather than trailing off.

How does that magazine cutout look in person? Probably by now it would be somewhat irregularly adhering to the page as the glue has dried over the decades. Any chance of seeing the rest of the piece....or the verso?

I'm attaching an image of an exemplar from PSA's site from this era. Perhaps I'm being too cautious (and feel free to disagree, certainly) but sadly Sinatra is one to be cautious with.

Again, feel free to take these thoughts for what their worth. There are things to like as well.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JK on October 19, 2022 at 7:29pm

I had also noticed the disruption to the card/paper and how it does not seem to impact the ink (i.e. - looks to be signed over it).

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on October 19, 2022 at 8:24pm

I appreciate your comments! This should be in my hands shortly and I can provide some better photos.

For fun, have a look at this 1996 signature from my collection that a private flight attendant was able to get. She found out she was working a flight for the Sinatras, ran out to get a CD, and kept it on her “just in case”. At the end of the flight, Sinatra gifted her a gold lighter as thanks, and she decided that was the moment to ask him to sign this CD for her mother. He obliged (and spelled her name wrong). I have this on display next to his 1939 Brunswick. His first album side by side with his last. Likely one of the last autographs he gave, as his health deteriorated even more that year and he was never seen in public again after.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 19, 2022 at 8:59pm

The lack of disruption at the key point is noted.

Blue (a good chunk of which were black):

Form:

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on October 19, 2022 at 9:14pm

That signature study is what I used when I decided to buy this one. I’ll post more photos when I have it in hand. Thanks for your feedback!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eddy on October 19, 2022 at 9:27pm

Yeah....from what I can see, there is definitely a bit of a difference between the driver's license signature and the matted signature. There's a kind of aged look to the license signature that the matted signature does not have as much of, IMHO. I'm on a 4K screen so have a pretty decent look at what's provided in the scans. Again, could be just fine. Just making observations after looking at Sinatra's signature a fair bit over time.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 19, 2022 at 9:41pm

They would be different years - all I was showing was the color blue. And who knows what type of glue was used, or when? Mucilage doesn't age quite like hide glue just due to it's composition. I don't know what was used or when. I see it as more recent. This could be a very well preserved example. I don't think it is secretarial I have most of his sigs from Thecead.com and this is not a secretarial s far as I can see. Loops are wrong for one. This would have to be a darn good forgery if not genuine. Maybe a big 4K screen is a hamper? IDK. Either way it was black or blue to start, the form appears in the range of later 1940's.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 19, 2022 at 9:35pm

I don't know where your question went but I will answer it. I meant that the the disruption seems to me not to be under that blue ink stroke. Near? Of course. When was the damage inflicted? I can't rightly say, but I think after. Maybe I am wrong. Not the first time to be sure. The signature displays a halo limited to just around the ink when viewed under certain conditions and that is a plus to me. It is an interesting case study.