Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on September 15, 2011 at 12:51pm

Wow...Jimmy Stewart was a really consistent signer, wasn't he? Most celebs aren't that careful these days. 

JSA has certified a lot of these autopens? If so, we should get a pile they certified side-by-side and show them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on October 29, 2011 at 3:07am

what is the collective think tank perspectives on these?  Two entirely looking different signatures

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on October 29, 2011 at 11:58am

The autographed photo with Jimmy Stewart and Julie Harris in gold is obviously bad, but I haven't studied Stewart's signature enough to comment on the one in blue.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on October 29, 2011 at 1:31pm

Why do you think it's bad?

I think they may both be okay.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on October 29, 2011 at 2:43pm

The J in the first one with that style typically cross into the A.  The last T is not crossed and the ewart just looks odd based on all the ones depicted here to date.  Even in contrast to the 2nd one. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on October 29, 2011 at 5:07pm

The anomalies could be explained by it was signed with a blobby paint pen, which was not his instrument of choice. Doesn't have the same smooth flow and it is harder to use than a felt tip.

I see subtle positive indicators in the gold signature. I would not be so quick to rule it a fake.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on October 29, 2011 at 5:10pm

I'd say the bottom one has a good chance of being genuine. I'd believe a lot more of these authenticated Harvey drawings were real if they had signatures more in line with that one.

The top one is a bit more of a pickle. The dash across the ar in Stewart is meant to be the crossing of the t by the way. I've seen a number of authentic signatures where the dash doesn't actually come in contact with the vertical line of the t.

I'm somewhat familiar with Julie Harris' signature as well. It's strange how I feel that both signatures have a number of aberrations but also a lot of things that ring true.

A couple odd things on Julie Harris' signature I pick up first. The J doesn't have a loop at the bottom and the s in Harris crosses back through to cross the i. Then there are some very good attributes. The u in Julie, the e in Julie and of course the dotting of the i in Julie landing over the e. The H in Harris looks good as well.

The odd thing I pick up on the James Stewart signature is the J like you did. I don't think it's disqualifying though. Perhaps a fast sign. It's hard to say. A lot of good attributes are present. Such as the m in James and the drop below baseline of the r in Stewart. Really the ames in James and the tewart in Stewart look good to me.

Something that makes me wonder, if a forger were so good with some pieces of the signature, why would they blow other portions? Like with a J in James that looks so off at first glance. That could just mean it's a fast sign. I think I'll refrain from giving an opinion on it because I just don't know.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on October 29, 2011 at 5:18pm

I echo your thoughts. I'd bet a pizza the gold signed is real. It was obtained in-person and later in life. It varies slightly from the standard sitting down mail request signatures, but key markers are still there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on October 29, 2011 at 5:26pm

Maybe you guys are right, but it does not look like his writing to me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on October 29, 2011 at 11:10pm

The rebirth of this topic has caused me to search through some more James Stewart autos on auction sites. I found this one, seemingly signed in the same gold pen or similar on eBay.

The J seems to be not fully finished on this either. I think it adds credence to Mr. Zipper's theory that this was a pen thing or it could mean this was the forger's M.O. which would be odd. Wherever and whenever these were signed, at whatever time. The signature looks decent in the same vein as the other one at first glance. I do have a little knowledge with some of the other autos on the matting but actually looking at them feels like a daunting task. Strange item. Sold for $46.

This next one is a silver pen of some sort.

The quality of the photo is kind of bad. I think the Best Wishes is fairly in line with other authentic pieces I've seen of his. This item looks okay, I think.

This one I thought I'd share because of the photo. It's not any autopen pattern I've seen of his and not at an angle like the autopens we usually see on this photo. The writing instrument used is thicker as well. The signature is undoubtedly not a forgery to me. It's strange to see a rare Jimmy Stewart sign just like his autopens were on the photo we see used for his autopens and have it be authentic.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on October 30, 2011 at 3:18am

Then there's this one up for auction at RR. I saw it when the catalog originally came out then forgot about it. Same thing with the J.

I also found another JSA seller with the same James Stewart autopen up for sale that we usually see. It's from Rich Altman, who has a lot of great, genuine material to sell as well.

 

Another person has the same one and guarantees in the listing that it'll pass PSA or JSA. Probably would. Probably would.

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on October 30, 2011 at 6:48am

I suspect this may be an unknown Autopen pattern. The consistant thickness of the lines is suspect. I'd love to see a close up to see if the Autopen hesitations are in the strokes. 

Here is something I put together years ago. Note all the Autopens are "Jimmy."

 

I found the two below in a stack of bookplates that were all Autopens, but these two did not have matching bookplates. I suspect these are Autopens as well.

 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• …
• 20
• Next ›
• Page