Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on July 31, 2017 at 6:03am

Here is a signed"Mind Games" album...Frank says it was signed in the mid 1970's...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on July 31, 2017 at 6:06am

One more"Helping Hands"...May 1975....

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on July 31, 2017 at 6:09am

What you might call "tricky"!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on July 31, 2017 at 6:12am

'Ya think???

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by miamijag on July 31, 2017 at 6:48am

Thanks to all for your input and opines. They are much appreciated. Any advice on my next course of action? Is anyone really good authenticating fresh to market items? I have several other validated Beatles signatures that have LOA's that I would like insurance values on, so it wouldn't be a one item job.  Thanks again to everyone

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on July 31, 2017 at 6:58am

I expect you'll hear the usual names - Frank, Tracks, Perry Cox, Roger Epperson. As far as I know only Roger offers authentication services.

With all the differences in the two discussion examples and the three authenticated examples posted by Jim, can anyone explain the key defining features of a genuine 75-80 Lennon - or the classic howlers made by forgers? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on July 31, 2017 at 9:05am

That would be like trying to explain how you know when you're looking at John and why you're able to pick him out in a crowd from others wearing the same hair style, or glasses.

Formation is less of an issue here than the written line itself. The actual way that the ink is applied to the paper is unlike typical Lennon.

Comparing exemplars to see if someone ever made an "L" like this, or an 'h' like that can be still result in a false negative or positive. First off, any exemplar could be the one that served as a model for a forgery. Second, learning to rely more on the eye, and developing that eye for the uniqueness of character related to an individual allows one to move beyond the still uncertainty of exemplar shopping as the primary means to base authentication on.

We see John Lennon's face, and we know that's John. It's not a guy with his hair styled like John, or a beard like John, or dressed like John. We know when we're looking at John by more than similar characteristics, or so many people would look like John. Anyone with a similar nose, or similar glasses, etc., might be John. But that isn't the way it is. We recognize John because of the symbiotic whole. Lots of info. Overwhelming visual cues that we don't have to run a checklist on in our minds before the realization dawns on us that it is John. And let's say we see someone that looks so much like John that he almost fools us, until we notice that he's about 80 at a time when John should be 30, I exaggerate to make a point.

I can write a 100 page treatise on why that Lennon on the top of the page isn't John, trying to explain verbally what the eye is seeing, but the ink doesn't lie, or should I say, in this case it does. It's not John. Doesn't even seem like he's really trying to fool anyone by being John. Much like if John donned horns, grabbed a pitchfork and tried to make a convincing Devil.

An architectural analogy more applicable to this signature would be like if you flew from Austin to Dallas, and when you arrived over Dallas, the skyline was still Austin. :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on July 31, 2017 at 9:15am

Or tasting a soup with the correct ingredients but in improper proportions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on July 31, 2017 at 9:42am

Yes, a good analogy. One step further, even if all that was so close as to fool many, as soon as your tongue touched the spoon, you'd know, "That's not my mother's chicken soup". It's just different. Not only the ingredients and proportions are obvious, but it's also cooked on a different stove, and in a different pot, etc., etc.

And that's not to say there's not subtle difference or variations in your mother's soup. One day, she might have put a little extra salt, maybe a few more noodles, or made the soup slightly thicker, or even put something in she didn't add before. You still would be able to tell, "that's my mother's soup", even if you didn't see her make it.

But there' things she wouldn't do, she wouldn't add, or subtract. Things that would cause you to say, "this isn't my mother's soup. She wouldn't put a monkey wrench in here".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on July 31, 2017 at 10:50am

Woody and Eric make some good points above but given the wide variety of Lennon's later signatures some further analysis of typical traits (by year) would be helpful. There are very useful studies on people like Monroe, Bogart, Garland and Taylor. None of these even pretend to give more than helpful hints on what to look for but they can at least give food for thought.

  

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 31, 2017 at 10:59am

I think that the one you posted has a decent chance of being good, Bruce. It's sure not an easy one for me, though. 

Miamijag, I'd get an online opinion from Epperson. If he likes it, then I think you can sleep at night.

Bruce, this was a great autograph to post for discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul on July 31, 2017 at 11:11am

There's a few posted here that you could buy with confidence, Sgt pepper for example, Mind games. You don't want to buy a Lennon and always be thinking did he sign it or not.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 7
• Next ›
• Page