We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Authenticity is Everything
Is this Eric Clapton autograph real?
Hi Everyone...
Is this Eric Clapton autograph real? Thanks for your opinions
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on
-
Thurston bell, a/k/a "Paul" Nigel Lane
Over an opinion on an autograph forum...
-
Permalink Reply by Thurston bell on
-
Joe in the short answer yes!
-
-
It only seems lkke you can have an opinion on this forum if you rub shoulders with someone. So be it!
-
-
Bye!
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on
-
People can have their own opinions. They can't use the kind of offensive language you used on Mr. Steffman, which I deleted.
I'm suspending you, Thurston, at least temporarily.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe W. on
-
Sorry, don't know what you mean by that. There is a correct way to discuss opinions and a incorrect way. Screaming the loudest doesn't necessarily prove you are right. Nor gain you respect.
-
-
There is only one problem I have with fee base authentication services. They are well intended although flawed. Back in the day(20 years ago) I spent some time with a well known and respected autograph dealer/expert. He taught me some basics about authenticating autographs based on the "three strikes you're out" principle. Three minor inconsistencies would eliminate a signature.
In the case of this Clapton, it would be considered authentic under this process. Which it, more than likely is. That's fine. There are MANY TPA certified autographs I would not want to own either. Doesn't make them fake.
TPA services are great at eliminating fakes. Unfortunately, where they do a disservice is failing items which are too close for comfort. I understand the reason why. First, there is money involved and second, why risk their reputation?
When an authentic autograph get questioned and "branded" without clear evidence people lose money. Sometimes great sums of money. Why is someone's paid opinion worth more than any other experienced collector? Too much power in too few hands is dangerous.
We should all work together to root out the obvious criminals instead of eating each other's flesh.
-
Permalink Reply by Mr. Steffman on
-
Great point, Joe. About eating each other's flesh.
I've never had a specific rule myself about how many incorrect factors it takes to pass, fail, or Could Not Determine on a signature. I break down each signature into factors and judge each factor against my pool to determine the likeliness of occurrence for each of the various factors. On this Clapton, my first response was "There's 4 factors that I dislike about this one."
For me, 3 or 4 factors that I cannot justify in my pool may be enough to fail. But if this were submitted to ACOA, I would then present the factors I have a problem with to other consultants after they've done their own independent review. If they find their own factors additionally, they would have to present them, and we would discuss the various factors we've all provided before a final conclusion is made. That is the process which I believe is the best method/approach. However, I am at least mildly hesitant to conduct that type of method on a public forum as not to ironically empower the wrong people.
In terms of this Eric, though, since Tim G. thinks I'm just inventing an opinion carelessly. I found that 0% of the authentic samples in my pool have an E-bottom that's this wide relative to it's height, have the ric so low relative to the E, or have an upward rising final line versus toward falling. Could it be real? Yes, of course it can. Statistically speaking, relative to my sample pool, I can't justify it though and with his minimalist signature and heavy forgery rate, why would I? Regardless, the strong disagreement amongst other members who believe it's likely real, still leaves me open-minded to expanding my Clapton sample pool to include samples which contain these factors I've noted as problematic.
-
Permalink Reply by goodcat on
-
"Could it be real? Yes, of course it can. Statistically speaking, relative to my sample pool, I can't justify it though and with his minimalist signature and heavy forgery rate, why would I? Regardless, the strong disagreement amongst other members who believe it's likely real, still leaves me open-minded to expanding my Clapton sample pool to include samples which contain these factors I've noted as problematic." quoted Mr Steffman
So let's look at this shall we...
You basically just said this Eric could be real.
But as a professional TPA, you are classifying it as Fake.
Do you see the problem with your thinking here? Cause I sure do.
Plus... I didn't say it's "likely" real. I said it's 100% REAL and I stand behind that. I have enough examples and other trusted people who's opinion also say it's real. No wishy washy answers here.... It's real... period.
If you are going to solicite yourself as a professional TPA, then you should at the very least give the people a straight and direct answer for the money. Don't you think that's fair?
My opinion is "free" and I'll bet you a box of donuts that I'm right.
-
-
I understand your position, Mr. Steffman. I don't envy anyone daring enough to become a professional authenticator. Thick skin required with very little margin of error to satisfy the public. A nearly impossible task.
I did not state my "three strikes" as a rule but rather a principle back in the day before eBay and TPA services. And, my point is that it is no longer simply a service to give collectors more peace of mind. It's becoming a marketing tool that big time sellers use to protect themselves from potential liability. Not necessarily your service but definitely the big three names in the business.
Unfortunately, just as many advanced collectors enjoy to hammer TPA when they make obvious errors there are also many authentic signatures that are failed; not because they are fakes but, rather, not neatly fitted.
Personally, I would rather see an occasional mistake made on giving a signature the benefit of the doubt instead of the other way around. What happens is that right to offer a "borderline" autograph and let the market decide is taken away when the difference is virtually undetectable to even most experienced collectors.
When certificates based on opinion rather than the autograph itself become more valuable than the ink on the paper, I see that as a problem. I'm an open minded guy and carefully listen to all points of view.
None of us want to end up with "big brother" deciding who can do what, when, and where. Buyers also have a responsibility to get the information they need before making a solid buying decision.
I will give you an example. A number of years ago I offered an Alfred Hitchcock autograph for sale on eBay. There were a number of bids already and it was receiving a lot of attention. It was removed by eBay. After which I received a message from a "buyer" that they still wanted to purchase the autograph and have it sent directly to RR Auction. At a lower price than it would have brought. Of course, it sold there at a much higher level there.
This type of stuff is still happening today. I'm not saying your service is involved in this type of activity but I do believe this going on all the time. TPA services can and are having a major influence on this hobby. It should not be used as a tool to sell autographs nor to stop others from competing on a level playing field.
-
Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on
-
I've been reading through this discussion and find it very interesting. Several points I'd like to make. I'm no Clapton expert but I believe this is authentic as well. There are key characteristics that I see as consistent. I may be wrong and will defer to more of a Clapton "expert". I agree with Joe. A paid "expert", in my opinion has way too much clout and power - with the exception of a handful who have proven their abilities in certain fields. I, myself, will listen to all opinions, do my homework and, ultimately, make my own decision. I believe that, in some cases, collectors have more knowledge than "experts". Having said that, I have no issue with Mr. Steffman voicing his opinion on this site along with his website link. If someone wants to utilize his service, that is their prerogative. Especially since Mr. Steffman voiced his specific reasons for deeming this a fake or questionable. Had he not done that, I think, he would lose credibility and it would appear that he was simply promoting his service. I think everyone here can have a valid opinion and it is up to the original poster to decide which ones he gives any weight to.
There was simply no need for this discussion to turn nasty in any way. Isn't this why we are all here, to discuss, debate, learn - there is no need for personal attacks, just differences of opinion. All of this makes for lively debate and, in the end, results in more education for all members. My two cents...time to go eat my doughnut …
Blog Posts
Ebay Seller Smpsportscards Sells Forged Counterfeit Willie Mays 1996-97 Topps Autograph Card
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
COA CSA Authentic Forged Babe Ruth Cut Autograph Laughable
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Ebay Seller Tsuch67 Sells Forged Mickey Mantle Duke Snider Willie Mays Baseball
Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments 0 Likes
Photos
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
