We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Reprints. What are your thoughts.

As collectors of autographs what is your opinion of high quality reprints.

Do you consider them fine if they are clearly defined as reprints for display purposes only?

Do they cause confusion? Are they deceptive?

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on July 23, 2018 at 5:53am

I'm not a fan.

Many of the "reprint" sellers on ebay steal their images from Heritage, RR, blogs, etc. They have no rights to use the images they use in many cases. I have had a number of images stolen from my blog, and it has caused me to significantly curtail posting images of items from my collection.
It dilutes the "uniqueness" of certain items and possibly erodes the value. What happens when the owner of the original wants to sell? His or her item is "old news" because a zillion reprints have been floating around eBay previously.
They clog up eBay searches with junk.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on July 23, 2018 at 6:14am

I agree that pirating someone else's possession is unethical. I ask this because I know a collector who has a wonderful collection of autographs. He does not actually sell his autographs but, rather, makes reprints and sells them one at a time. Does quite well with that and it covers his investment eventually. He is not flooding the market although I could see where it could decrease the uniqueness of the original.

I once owned a beautiful Madonna signed photo. While it was being offered someone contacted me and asked me if I knew mine was a reprint and being sold dirt cheap. I didn't have a clue that someone had used my photo and made reprints. Thus, the case for watermarking.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on July 23, 2018 at 6:01am

I think they are worthless. what makes me laugh is a "high quality" reprint of a forgery. I see those all the time.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on July 23, 2018 at 6:05am

True. Is there anything more bottomfeeder than a reprint to display a fake? LOL

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on July 23, 2018 at 6:19am

As an autograph collector I would agree with you terrier. Although, I could see an interest in a reprint at a lower cost for someone wanting to decorate their room/office without the cost of buying the genuine article. It is funny that some reprints are of fakes but I really don't think that matters to the buyer in the first place. They just think the photo is cool.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Judge Nutmeg on July 23, 2018 at 6:31am

I'm of the opinion that reprints take away the whole flavour of autograph collecting. Personally, i collect autographs in order to have a direct connection with the individual who signed the piece. A reprint is just as far removed from a forged piece - the only difference being is the reprint is never in question.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on July 23, 2018 at 6:55am

The real danger is the current trend to take old album pages or paper and print an autograph on it making it look real. There are number of these that I personally feel comes very close to forgeries although most use RP somewhere. Whereas I am certain that close examination would prove them reprints they certainly will fool the first time buyers out there. eBay should not have those type of reprints. While I am not wild about preprinted photographs most of those were officially sent out so I suppose have some value. The modern reprints in my opinion have no value and are used to deceive people. Will eBay put a stop to it? Of course not they benefit from it.