Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 18, 2014 at 12:26pm

Some more..: Michael Collins, Bing Crosby, Fred Astaire 

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• IMG_6807.JPG, 2.2 MB
• IMG_6858.JPG, 1.9 MB
• IMG_6751.JPG, 2.2 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 18, 2014 at 12:41pm

Elisabeth Taylor ( ink-stains on it )

Genuine or secretarial ? 

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• IMG_6964.JPG, 2.5 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 19, 2014 at 11:48pm

This Elizabeth Taylor looks fine.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on August 20, 2014 at 4:26am

Not so sure about the Taylor. The "E" is a bit wild for my liking and the mess in the middle of the Christian name is odd. Maybe it was a slippery surface or a dodgy pen but I've certainly seen more convincing examples.

Could you post your examples the right way up. It is bad enough trying to authenticate autographs without any added complications.

Could you also post an in-focus version of the Garland and the Einstein in lower resolution - it takes minutes to load. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 20, 2014 at 12:38pm

Thanks for your help :-)

I am not sure how to do a lower resolution..?

B.R. Søren 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 20, 2014 at 5:17pm

While it's not what I would use as a prime exemplar of her signature (even discounting the ink spots), I'd say it's okay. The first letter "E" in Elizabeth doesn't really strike me as especially odd, though. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 20, 2014 at 12:43pm

Could this be better ?

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• IMG_6793.JPG, 83 KB
• IMG_6750.JPG, 811 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on August 21, 2014 at 11:56am

Thanks for these much better images. I can only comment on Judy. I fear she may be secretarial. One atypical thing is that the surname kind of fizzles out with a small "d". The wild underlining is also not so typical. It would help to know when the drawing was signed as her signature changed a lot over the years (making it more fascinating to me). There is an excellent article on Judy's signature that was originally published by this site's magazine (now sadly no longer with us). Here is a link (if it doesn't work just Google Judy Garland autograph study):

http://rrauction.k2imgs.com/content/pdf/Autograph_Magazine_Judy_Gar...

Hope this helps.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 21, 2014 at 12:02pm

The Garland is from 1948.

Thanks for your kind help :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 21, 2014 at 12:07pm

I just saw the article. If it is an authentic Garland it looks very much like the example from the article.

Her signature in the mid and late 1940`ies seems to have more underlinings than from any other periods.

That would match perfectly for this particular drawing which is dated 1948.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Søren Marsner on August 21, 2014 at 12:10pm

Sorry ! Now I see that the examples from the article was on secretarials - and that looks just the same as mine.:-(

So - I am now in the same opinion. It must be a secretarial. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 21, 2014 at 8:18pm

One resource you can use, if you haven't already, is a webiste called http://isitreal.com/. You can click on a category and then type a name in to find examples of the person's secretarial autograph. They have quite a large database of Golden Age film stars. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page