Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 15, 2011 at 7:26am

This is helpful. Thanks!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 15, 2011 at 3:17pm

Greg, are u merely focusing in on the My Best Wishes as this JA is connected and while not in the tradtional sense of others but.....   thus we need to deliniate conjecture from secretarial.  This is not the 1st time that one of your pictures produced has done this including the one that was labeled "in person".  For this to take hold we must eliminate these rather than simply declare "day x" while merely condemning TPA.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 16, 2011 at 4:20pm

Did anyone check out Jackie Gleason on the new classic Hollywood signature database?

http://www.thecead.com/gnamesfolder/gleasonjackie.pdf

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 16, 2011 at 4:27pm

What database? Is this in their exemplar database?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 1:39am

no. that is a lot being offered for sale.  desc entitled incorrectly in write-up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin conway on August 16, 2011 at 4:51pm

As long as PSA does NOT employ any kind of "standard" with their analysis, mistakes can be expected.   Also, what may contribute are conflicts of interest where PSA utilizes as experts the same people for which PSA is doing the majority of certifications for..??

 

There is a reason why Building developers/car makers/submarine manufacturers AND those who TEST them are NOT one and the same.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin conway on August 16, 2011 at 6:29pm

Gregg,

I try to stay out of the fray.   As you know it is a very subjective environment, those who have a "blind" allegiance to a particular company and will go on the attack if you go against the grain, those who hate and negatively spew everything about 3rd party authentication. 

So stop by here periodically mostly to read and listen, maybe pick up something worthwhile like a case study or an objective analysis as you have done here.    And only comment on what I have expertise in, which will Never be everything.

As far as Gleason? Would you believe it was the very first autograph I ever bought?  It was at an autograph auction on a reproduction poster for “Smokey and the Bandit” about 30 years ago.  And, at that time I didn't even know what "secretarial" meant.   I would soon learn thanks to JG...;}

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 2ro69jm8dyt5i on August 16, 2011 at 6:41pm

The PSA/DNA database examples look forged to me.  Not real and not the secretary.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 16, 2011 at 7:59pm

The full-size ones looked secretarial to me. The ones in the square are too small for me to tell.

But checking against the exemplars in www.thecead.com, most if not all of Greg's determinations of secretarials are accurate.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 2ro69jm8dyt5i on August 16, 2011 at 6:40pm

I like this Steve.  Good stuff!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 16, 2011 at 7:09pm

www.thecead.com's determination of Jackie Gleason secretarials is pretty consistent with Greg's determination.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin conway on August 16, 2011 at 8:09pm

 

  I would be so bold as to say the PSA authenticators (those on the daily assembly line "trying" to do Hollywood) are NOT in the same league as Tom Kramer

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page