We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks. 

Good evening fellow autograph enthusiasts. I hope everyone is having a good holiday season.

ive been reading up on how to spot questionable autographs - especially Mickey Mantle’s. (Great older article in this site about ID’ing the “banana” forgeries.)

That being said, I have a couple that I’m still not quite able to figure out; I’d welcome opinions on these.

#1 is on a Bobby Brown ball

#2 is a signature box on a display piece 

#3 is (probably obviously) a photograph

Thanks all!

Tags: Mantle, Mickey

Views: 555

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

photo is a common forgery.   the other two are fine.

Thanks for the reaponse... may I ask how you can tell? When I compare the ball to the photo, they seem almost identical to me... I see some slight nuisances in the “m” on Mantle, but otherwise the shape seems very similar to me.

the best way to tell is to study known authentic examples.  then when you see one of these forgeries, they will become obvious to you.  

When you say it like that, it seems simple. However, it’s well documented that signatures change over time (and even from moment to moment). If you look at exemplars, you will even see significant variation between different examples.

Case in point... a couple of exemplars certified as authentic... Each looks different and has some common characteristics with the one identified in the initial 3 samples as “not genuine.”

Attachments: No photo uploads here

maybe so, but there are also characteristics that remain consistent and that is the case with Mantle.

Thanks... I read all of those articles prior to posting this thread.

The third one is a machine signed forgery that came out of Florida. All that we’ve seen were printed on inkjet photo paper, which came out around the time Mantle died. 

Keep in mind that even when the autograph looks good it could be a copy. The framed clip could be one. 

another good rule of thumb is that When you see the "pork chop finger" or the "huckster toothy smile" poses run like rabbit with thorn in paw....

The photo you show is an easy to spot "huckster toothy smile pose." Same stupid pose over and over again is another reason it's so easy to tell. I have never seen that pose with an authentic signature PERIOD. NOR have I ever seen the "pork chop finger" pose authentic. It's an exclusive only for the forgers, fakes, and F%#$%&*

All right... I get the “huckster” name for the one photo, but you need to explain the “pork chop” name for the one with Mays... I looked at that photo and can’t figure out why you call it that.

Thanks for the response Steve. It’s interesting... if it was machine printed, the machine managed to change pressure of the marker well enough to create nuisances in the signature that make it look hand signed upon close inspection.

Your comment about the paper makes sense... the paper could be a give-away. This particular example doesn’t have any water marks on the back that you would expect from photo paper (eg Kodak paper), but the front of it is a very high gloss that you would expect from a true developed photo. Tough to distinguish.

If you post a full-size high resolution, crisp image I may be able to show you the signs.

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service