We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Beatles full signed color photo
Hello,
I bought this a few days ago in an auction.
It is an full color intact pull-out photo included in an 1964 UK-magazine called „Scream“.
I‘m very interested to know what you think about it, thank you.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
It is more than suggestive. It appears a stranglehold.
-
Permalink Reply by Eddy on
-
I just looked at those headache inducing, fine print Terms and Conditions. There's nothing I 'Gotta Have' that badly at the present time.
-
-
Well said.
-
Permalink Reply by Josh Board NEW & Improved on
-
I don't like it. Too perfect. Too good a price. I mean...not any of the signatures over the hair (darker part of photo), perfectly placed. Nobody else bidding. I hope I'm wrong.
-
Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on
-
I don't think anyone has gone into the question of when this piece was signed and under what circumstances. I was originally under the impression that the lady featured in the magazine met the Beatles and had the magazine signed by them but I don't think that the auction particulars actually state this. I don't think they even state that Angela Deare was a real person. If "Angela" did get the Beatles to sign when would this have been and are the autographs consistent with other examples from that time period? I cannot see an exact publication date (month). I have a set signed in February 1964 under peaceful circumstances - the presentation of a competition prize - and the signatures are not really like those in the OP and certainly less neat. I would post a few pics but I don't see the relevant buttons that would enable this.
Another question is whether the REAL and JSA opinions are quick or full.
-
-
eva you are raising excellent concerns about the actual provenance.
As far as the question of REAL and JSA opinions, it does state in the auction description that both of them are LOAs which would indicate that the magazine was examined in person or 'fully authenticated' as the saying goes. Whatever one feels about these papers, just wish auctioneers would show them along with the photos of the item itself in lot listings so there wouldn't be that kind of confusion.
-
-
It just dawned on me that I could post a link to a previous post I made about tbe competition set. Here it is:
https://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/feel-good-post-1-co...
-
Permalink Reply by michelle on
-
Oh I say Mr Pug!!! Your set just posted has a spontaneity (sic I dont know how to spell it) and a warmth that just hits you when you look at this set.
-
Permalink Reply by spaceman on
-
I have been mulling over the above item since viewing it.
Another signed 1963 Royal Command Performance picture magazine was in the same auction. They are Similar signatures with different ink and layout.
Both rare items with the same COAS. I don't beleive I have ever seen any other signed copies of either magazines.
The auction lot descriptions seem very low key for such rare items. Both were considered "Good Condition". The Scream magazine signatures are mint.
I have issues with Paul's signature on both items. The straight line from the T to the N on both signatures do not seem typical. Where is the wave or shape.
Are my concerns Real. No pun intended.
-
Permalink Reply by fab432 on
-
It’s quite remarkable when you see something like Pug posted you automatically get a sense this is indeed a genuine set of autographs with or without the excellent provenance.
-
-
This does look lifeless now.
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
