Comment by PICTURE PROOF AUTOGRAPHS on August 1, 2016 at 1:49pm

Yes, I do agree that a photo is not always proof that the autograph is real.

That is why most all my Picture Proof Autographs were obtained by using a 135 mm camera, so I could cut the negatives' and tape it to the back of the photo for full Picture Proof.

Which I still don't understand with all the forgeries and scum bags in this business why all autograph collectors and dealers don't take pictures of their autographs being signed, and why collectors don't demand dealers to supply Picture Proof Photos when they are buying an autograph.

I myself after collecting Picture Proof Autographs for close to 40 years would not trust an autograph that did not come with a photo of proof, specially in these days with everyone having access to camera's.  

That was just one story of a Picture Proof Photo gone bad, but I trust a photo more than I do C.O.A., because a lot of times those are even worst to tell if its real,

And besides, if you still want the C.O.A., a Picture Proof Photo of your Picture Proof Autograph helps the Authenticator to authenticate your autograph. 

Comment by Rich on August 1, 2016 at 2:37pm

Because not every autograph is signed sitting at a table.

Comment by CJCollector on August 1, 2016 at 4:31pm

Great work, Steve.

As we all know, all of those Mantle, Ford, Martin and DiMaggio "autographs" with COAs from GFA (Stephen Rocchi) are all pathetic forgeries; mass-produced forgeries.

Sellers of this crap will do anything to sell their garbage to the delusional autograph collectors on Ebay.

Comment by terrier8HOF on August 1, 2016 at 4:50pm

Steve, you are right on.  Another RED FLAG for collectors would be that some of these GFA certed forgeries, like the one in the photo, are listed in large quantities.  And selling for 49 bucks????  Come on, where is the common sense?

Comment by PICTURE PROOF AUTOGRAPHS on August 2, 2016 at 6:05am

Well Rich, if you would have check out my photos of  over 5,000 Picture Proof Autographs, you would have seen that most of them have not come from a controlled sit down autograph session, but from a pit row garage chase. I never said it was easy. It takes determination,  practice and just how authentic you want your autograph collection.

 Though it is harder to do, I would  much rather take the trouble and time to take a photo of the autograph being signed than to spend money to an authenticator to authenticate an autograph that basically does the same thing. Prove that the autograph is real.

Comment by CJCollector on August 2, 2016 at 3:39pm

Ebay seller Rbisportsinc had a few GFA-certed Ali auctions where he was selling 8-10 in one auction.

Where the heck is the common sense!!!

Click on below image to get a closer view.

Ebay seller Rbisportsinc sold eight (8) of the above GFA-certed Ali forgeries in one auction.

Again, where the heck is the common sense!!!!!

Comment by Brick Hunter on August 2, 2016 at 5:48pm

Nice detective work, Mr. Zipper. Unfortunately, the people they're going to dupe are probably never going to be able to find this information out for themselves. Sometimes I see proof pictures that don't add up (like a different colored pen or sharpie than the one on the autographed item) and I wonder if the picture is just there to say, "Look! We've had access to this celebrity -- or at least taken a photo of them -- or at least stolen someone else's photo of them!"

Comment by PICTURE PROOF AUTOGRAPHS on August 4, 2016 at 1:44pm

Steve, I think you did a great job on your article, but when you say rarely does it tell the truth, I have to disagree, most of the time it is telling you the truth, it is telling you if it is real or fake. And if there are thousands of forged picture proof autographs out there, then there are hundred of thousands of forged autographs being sold with no proof. At least when the autograph comes with a picture proof photo that you are interested in buying, you the buyer have the opportunity to judge that photo yourself to see if there is any flaws in it such, 

  Is the person actually signing the same item that your buying?    Is it being signed with the same colored pen as on the item?  Is the autograph located on the same location as in the photo?  Is the thickness of the pen strokes of the autograph match that's on the photo? and the one I like the most, that the photo shows the hand of him signing, but magically does not show the item your buying!

These are chance that you do get before you buy a Picture Proof Autograph than just buying an autograph with no proof from a dealer that expects you to just trust him. I don't trust anybody when it comes to money. I Want Proof!!! Maybe he is a trusted dealer, but my luck would be I choose to buy from him when he needed some extra cash and decided to turn to the dark side.

Besides, Since most of my autographs were done on a pit row chase, some of the autographs look like Chicken scratch. I don't care how much you study on loops and techniques in a signature, when you are collecting pit row chase autographs, the same person can sign his name in multi-ways that don't even look like his.  I have a Dale Earnhardt Jr. autograph that probably no one would say it was authentic if I didn't take the Picture Proof Photo of him signing it.

And I would rather buy an autograph that came with a (P.P.P.) instead of a C.O.A. because these days anybody and their mother can self proclaim themselves as authenticators who distributes C.O.A. that are no better than toilet paper.

And even an authenticator can be wrong, his wasn't there when the autograph was actually signed, But the one good thing about having a job as an authenticator, is that you are hardly wrong, even when you are. Who is going to judge you except another authenticator.

What I am saying is the same thing you are, If you collect autographs, you should obtained them as Picture Proof Autographs, if not to just proof that they are real, but maybe to proof that it isn't, because these days, all other autographs with no proof  are more of a crap shoot 

Comment by Steve Zarelli on August 4, 2016 at 2:19pm

You seem very defensive about this. It was not intended as an attack on ALL sellers who use some form of photo proof. Obviously, there are legitimate sellers who do so.

The fact of the matter is that there are many crooked sellers who use bogus "proof photos," and this was one instance where the alleged proof photo only proves the item could not have been signed by Billy Martin!

Comment by PICTURE PROOF AUTOGRAPHS on August 4, 2016 at 3:10pm

Everything Fine!!! I thought it was a good subject.

Maybe I do get little defensive on this subject after spending close to 40 years collecting Picture Proof Autographs. I just try, like you, to help other autograph collectors of the pit falls of this business. Though I am not a dealer, at least not yet, sometimes I do get tired of hearing from the collectors and dealers that collect and sell autographs without Picture Proof Photos ( and there is a lot many more of them than that do) how it is not necessary and it is ridiculous to collect with  Picture Proof Photos, like I am personally attacking their way of collecting. Which I don't care. I feel anybody can collect how ever which makes them happy.

Actually, I hope you didn't think I was attacking you. This hobby/business needs good and trusted authenticators like you or how else would you help out others and police all the forgers and scum bags that are in it!!!

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page