We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Autographs being reinked and restored
Some time ago I seen a beatles set that had been restored By a professional,they touched up the boys signatures around about 15 percent of the signatures were reworked.
Does anyone have any idea if this is a good idea to have signatures restored and would anyone have any pictures of reworked autographs.
Does it effect the value of the sets or signatures?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Null on
-
I would think this would most definitely devalue the item a ton... In my eyes it's the same as "going over" a faint signature with a marker on your own...
-
Permalink Reply by Dan Gregory on
-
Agree with Ryan, I would never want an item that had been reinked
-
Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on
-
no thank you, not in the least interested of this. I would say you might as well by a preprinted signature. If someone else is putting their ink on top it is losing that personal touch, just to brighten it up a bit. Sure, the artist stood in front of it X number of years ago, which is part of the thrill to me, but i'd rather have faded period signatures.
-
Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on
-
In my view it is tantamount to vandalism. Of course once a person buys something it is theirs to do with as they see fit, but it my right to cringe. Why any would think it is a good idea to have Charlie Nobody go over a Beatles or Mantle is beyond me. I agree with another person in a different thread who said if someone had a restoration done and did not put that in the description it is the same as fraud. Come to think of it why is tracing over a genuine signature that much different than forgery? The person doing it to make it appear better than it is and thus more valuable. As a historian by profession I suppose I find it more objectionable than others. As a collector I would pass on any kind of retouched/restored autograph.
-
-
How about restoring pieces.like cleaning up a piece ,example :blotches stains etc.does that also devalue a piece?
-
Permalink Reply by James on
-
I don't know if it does, but it should. Through the years, it always seemed like I heard that if you "tamper" or alter a valuable collectible, you essentially ruin it, thus making it almost worthless. However, that doesn't seem to always be the case anymore. Just go on eBay, and it becomes apparent how so many old Babe Ruth signed baseballs have been professionally cleaned. There are just way too many near-white Ruth balls. Plus, I think it's funny the number of near-white Ruth baseballs that have a highly-faded autograph. It appears that while trying to clean the ball to make it "gorgeous", the idiots also nearly washed the autograph away! Then they try to sell their beautifully clean Ruth ball, now with a signature you can hardly see, for like $7000. If the ball were legitimately clean, then the signature generally should be fairly bold.
It's funny, though, when these would-be sellers send their Ruth balls to PSA/DNA for authentication, PSA won't mention that the ball has been tampered with by way of a cleaning process.
-
-
Like beauty the "value" of anything is in the eye of the beholder. Personally anything I buy I want "as is" with nothing done to it. I believe there is a growing number of serious collectors that feel the same way. There was a thread here somewhere about removing inscriptions from photographs and the effect on value. I actually bought a couple photographs that upon inspection there was evidence of the removal of inscriptions. I promptly bought replacements for those autographs (fortunately none too rare). If I ever decide to sell obviously I would state I believe the inscriptions had been removed. Not to do so would be unethical in my book. As a general rule if you buy something and intend someday to sell it I would leave it alone and let the new buy decide how to deal with stains etc. If you are dealing with a Ty Cobb baseball do you really want it to be completely white and clean? The patina and stains of an old baseball are part of the history and charm I think. The same with album pages, photographs and documents. As for value I also look for signs of age on older items. I do not want it to look new. The signs of age are part of the process I use to determine if it may be fake or not. So if I see something that looks too good I would pass in a heartbeat. So if you clean an item will there be a buyer if it is rare? Probably it just wouldn't be me.
-
-
Hi Paul, I have some examples of this but I would rather not show them as it would open a huge can of worms to the people that own them and they are very high dollar pieces. Some of the owners know about the restoration as the original seller told them but I know the others do not as it wasn't disclosed in the auction listing. I do know that on some of the pieces that signatures that were originally done in pencil were reinked to make them appear in pen as well as signatures that were on a photo that you couldn't see the signatures, just the indentation where the pen didn't take originally. Also pieces that have been cleaned up and having the smears and smudges removed from the paper or album and original inscriptions removed. Another thing that people do is take 4 separate signatures and have them placed together on a piece of paper or on an album. When holding it you would never know that they were originally on 4 separate items. The hard part about that is getting the right period date signatures of the signatures for the one piece. I have seen several Please Please Me albums that were created by actually using original signatures and placing them IN the album. When the the restorer does this the indentation from when the cut out or groove the album cover to place the original signatures inside make it appear even more real as it looks like you are actually seeing the indentation of the pen. So basically you take autographs that are REAL andd would pass ANY third party authentication like PSA and even Frank Caiazzo and are placing them on a real album that you can't even feel with your fingers because they are actually inside the album cover. Thus making your original $5,000 or 6,000 autographs now worth $30,000 and up. And it only costs you $300 to $400 to get this done. I know of a guy who bought a real Babe Ruth autographed baseball for $2,000 to $2,500 and had it reminded and had it authenticated and graded by PSA and later sold it for over $35,000. It only cost him $75 to have it reminded and another $50 to get the ball cleaned up.
-
Permalink Reply by michelle on
-
terrifying and really mega interesting post - thanks for this info Anthony. Did you know some of the restorers then? so basically could some of the beatles albums being currently sold by top beatles experts have been restored without the experts knowing?. so really it is safer to buy a beatles set on a piece of paper than on an album unless you actually knew the seller purchased the album years ago .? If I actually had the money to buy a Beatles album this really interesting post would make me rethink because it seems to be safer to buy a beatles set on a piece of paper ; - but now you have to triple check that all 4 sigs match the year they were supposed to be signed. thanks for the post .
I also wonder how many beatles albums have been sold unknowlingly by all the major auction houses for thousands of dollars which will have been restored in this way?
-
-
Hi Michelle, I know of 2 main restorers that do work like this. I have seen it done and actually physically held the pieces to see them after it was done. In short, it's amazing. They were able to take a piece of paper that had been folded over and over and signatures were obtained on each section of the various folds. When the paper was unfolded it revealed signatures on the front and back of the paper and they were upside down or sideways, etc. Two were in pencil the other two in ink. The restorer actually sliced the paper in HALF thus separating the front and back into TWO separate pages. Then Reinked the pencil signatures to ink to about 65-75% darkness so they would appear as rubber stamped looked. Then cut several of the signatures and placed them in order going top to bottom in a row. Then he airbrushed the lines out of the paper and affixed it to a heavier cardstock and in short it was amazingly beautiful piece when finished. I actually held this piece and couldn't tell it had been created until I saw the before pictures. I've seen several pictures and fan club cards with signatures added to them to complete them. In short, if a person was going to purchase a high dollar Beatles piece I would get the complete history of it before purchasing it. You have to remember that these items just don't appear out of the blue. Everyone knows they are valuable and everyone looks for them and most all have been found. The top authenticators have a complete digital database they reference which is broken down by year starting in 1955 (before the Beatles were Beatles or famous) through the present. It's all broken down in categories like signed photos, pictures, lps, menus,etc. and even solo signatures and partials, etc. and believe it or not, it even shows some before and after images of pieces that have been restored or other things. I hope this info helps. Thanks
-
-
thanks for this invaluable information Anthony. Another question is whether the major authenticators tell potential clients whether something has been restored or not. However, what is spooky is that are far too many beatles signed pieces up for sale at all the major auction houses so not all of them can be genuine; - it just doesn't add up. Look how many turn up . Really great post
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
