In its base definition, someone other than the celebrity who signed originally took a ballpoint pen and "reemphasized" the faded ink. The next to last photo shows what you need to see. Not something I would want. IF I recall correctly, I do not care for this seller. The "professional" - so uneven and stop and start as the Moon sig - all poorly done as if by a child. The results appears like a forgery with so much hesitation. :(
Thank you, Eric! I wasn’t seriously considering it, but was intrigued. Yes the Moon is very shaky in spots. I thought there may have been more to the process of re-inking than the obvious retracing course!!!
Well, apparently not in this case! ;) You are welcome John.
That Who LP is basically garbage now.... crying shame
IDK. I could see someone wanting it on a budget. I don't think it looks too bad from a distance. The original faded autographs looked poor, so it is a losing proposition either way. It is up to the buyer and seller if the right choice was made.
Re-traced would be a more apt term. I think it looks better; it just looks traced. Unless you are analyzing it closely, you may not notice.
I have no knowledge if the original faded autographs were authentic. He is listing it for what claims to be 10% of the value if it were not re-traced.
Personally I doubt I would ever want to own something like that, unless extremely rare and other options were not available. Even then...doubtful, unless extraordinarily rare. I would think maybe retracing a small part would be more acceptable, but entire signatures...IDK.
Then again, look at the art world and necessary restorations there.
There is an ebay listing of one of the gentleman who played the Tin Man in Wizard of OZ. It is priced extremely high and claims to be his last autograph. If you read the description, his wife stamped it, and the actor who was in the hospital and had suffered a stroke traces his signature over the stamp. If the person wrote their name on it, or traced it...it is a signature...what you do before or after doesn't change that, but may make it less desirable.
$600usd is not 10% of the value if were original sigs
Not much chance of them fetching 6K if they were original
It would have been better leaving them as they were without reinking restoring them etc,- they look awful now, much worse than had they been left as they were imo
I wonder if there would be some better way to "reink" these in a more scientific way or with chemicals, rather than retracing? I really have no clue. ;-)
Hello, art is not a direct correlative here in my opnion. Properly done restoration of any truly valuable canvas or panel is always "underdone" to just suggest what is missing, no more. It is reversible and never quite the same color or sheen. From a distance the work can be enjoyed as "whole" but up closer you can see the in-painting deliberately. To do otherwise...not cool or ethical.