We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
To Proof or Not To Proof...that is the question
When I first came onto the autograph scene as a dealer I immediately saw the need for a dealer who could establish himself above the rest as reputable for in-person autographs and saw to this by trying to provide as much provenance and piece of mind as possible to my customers. We did this by including dates/locations and also by taking photos of us getting our items signed. Of course it's a madhouse getting in-person autographs if you aren't doing a sit-down signing so obviously we weren't able to get photos of every item being signed. Just taking one photo often means that person could have gotten another autograph, so to do that meant a sacrifice but at the time it was worth it. Fast forward 15 years later and we have people buying proof images from paparazzi, we have authentication companies getting paid for semi-educated guesses, and the list goes on, so I'm wondering if including those 'generic' proof photos have the value they once did.
My question is this, as a buyer do you find any value in the seller including a 'generic' proof photo, at least in the description? I don't think anyone would have a problem receiving that photo free and included with their purchase should they want to frame it with the item. By generic I mean it's either of another one of the seller's other items being signed or of someone else's items being signed while the seller was there. I've gone through a faze with this proof photo concept. Initially I included as many of my proof images with each listing, trying to establish that little added credibility that customers need. Once I started hearing a few say "this doesn't even show them signing that item" I decided to add a blurb in the description educating the buyer on our intentions. Something similar to "We are adding in the proof image to show that we were actually there when this item was being signed. While we'd love to have photos of ALL of our items being signed, it's simply impossible and to be honest, rude to keep snapping away. If you visit our other items you'll see we do have what is known as "EXACT PROOF" on several items where you see our exact item being signed. We try to get that with every item but when we can't, we at least try to include a photo taken at the time of signing".
Recently I've opted for a more condensed listing. I just want simple, quality images, short precise descriptions, and premium items. I don't know if there's a need or desire from others to have that in the description so I'm anxious to hear your input.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Paul on
-
On the topic of Brian wilson and the Beach Boys I buy off Perry cox and I don't really need a photo to know he has been around the guys signing or had one of his counterparts obtain signatures. I have seen him in photos with them but I don't want a photo unless it's John lennon or someone whos not around anymore. It comes down to being reputable in the business.
-
Permalink Reply by Rich on
-
I've seen "proof photography" abused plenty of times, sometimes from clear forgery sellers, or even sometimes from otherwise sellers using them way out of context (i.e. musician signing at a concert years before the item in question was signed). I always found the latter puzzling, as that supposed supporting evidence might only have the opposite effect in that it could dissuade potential buyers due to the appearance of deceptive practices.
While there have certainly been some extreme positions posted on this forum ("I only buy autographs with exact photo proof" vs. "All photo proof is garbage - go on the signature alone"), I'm somewhere in the middle. I guess I tend to like it when sellers use it effectively, and that doesn't mean perfection. Ebay sellers like Jodeci78, thefriendlystranger, buffylover, norbsob99, newgraphs and several other IP collectors use photographic proof to great effect. Sometimes they get lucky and get exact proof, sometimes not. The general effort I'm seeing though does lend to their credibility. That being said, if an autograph looks messy, rushed, is overpriced, etc., then I don't really want it regardless of the accompanying proof.
-
Permalink Reply by Carlos on
-
To me if you say you have proof you should have proof of the item being signed
Just a pic of the person with you or with another item is shady and can actually deter people (as it should in my opinion)
-
-
I think one of the big problems is that the word "proof" is used too liberally with some of these photos. In most instances of even legit use by good sellers, I think the word "evidence" might be a bit more fitting.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe W. on
-
Reputation. Period. No photos necessary. Some things never change. Customers are earned one at a time and kept based on the integrity of the seller. Authenticity, pricing, shipping, and good customer service.
-
Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on
-
I have done the inperson autograph thing, and let's be honest, you want that extra piece or five signed...playing games with a camera to get exact proof just doesn't happen. I don't see any issue with photos of the celeb signing at the event where your item was signed. Snapping a few shots as the celeb is scribbling away for the guys in front of or in back of you makes sense.
I think the major issue with "proof" pics is the guys like the former "autographczar" who loved to post images of his guy with the celebs. People who were at the events or people who had the brains to check out Press photos were quick to realize that the images used as "proof" were from as much as a decade earlier.
As an example a picture of you with Robert Downey Jr. from the 1990's used to sell an Iron Man signed photo......who is kidding who there?
I think images from the actual signing event make perfect sense, but don't screw around and use ancient proof pics if your guys couldn't get the shot last night.
-
Permalink Reply by Ryan Maxwell on
-
Honestly, proof photos raise a red flag for me. If the autograph is authentic, it should hold up on its own. Unless there is a photo of the exact item being signed, I tend to shy away from sellers who use these photos. I'm sure not every seller abuses this, but most do.
Just my own opinion and feelings.
Photos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
