Interesting "coincidence" in autographed photos bought through Proxibid

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Get a Click Eraser.
I bought two autographed photos of Ted Williams from Always At Auction.
This was an experiment because I had doubts about the way these "autographs" were "placed" on the photo.
Click Eraser will erase sharpie ink on glossy photo paper.
It did not erase the ink on the two photos I bought.

So in other words, if you can erase them they are real?

[Maddog]

Originally Posted by Deertick

So in other words, if you can erase them they are real?

Really on the picture at least

[Bossfan]

Originally Posted by Deertick

So in other words, if you can erase them they are real?

There's one that I don't care too much about, so it will be a good test subject.

[Smanzari]

I'm a frequent IP Autographer and some places (like Costco and CVS) print your name on the back of photos when ordered, while others just use generic numbers or letters. I'm thinking this could possibly be the case here... (as you stated in your first post)

[basesareempty]

If the Ray Lewis autograph looks good as long as it is an autograph and not part of the photo. Consistent with every Ray Lewis Auto I have ever gotten.

[Bossfan]

So, I got the Clic Eraser and tried it on the very end of Denard Robinson's name (his was one of the pictures I really didn't care too much about). It came off so, at least for that one, it's real ink and not copied ink. As basesareempty said, the Ray Lewis does look pretty real. It's hard to imagine that Toni Maynard, whoever that is, has so much access to so many athletes.

This whole dialogue makes me wonder how PSA/DNA and JSA make the initial determination whether a signature on a photo is real ink versus a photocopy. I can't imagine they do what I did by testing it with a Clic Eraser.

[steve B]

If you hold it up in good light, and look at a shallow angle - Sort of if you're looking from one edge and the far edge is the horizon- Most inks from a marker will be thick enough to see them as being on top of the photo rather than everything being flat because the sig is part of the photo.

Or, ball point will show the indents.

Steve B

[Deertick]

My loupe does a good job. Nice white LED light.

Has anyone seen these images before? Are they images that may have been downloaded, printed and then taken to be signed? I doubt she has that type of access without having any professional web presence.

The markings on the back looks to support a digital file being printed, i.e. her name, player name/identifier?

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by Bossfan

So, I got the Clic Eraser and tried it on the very end of Denard Robinson's name (his was one of the pictures I really didn't care too much about). It came off so, at least for that one, it's real ink and not copied ink. As basesareempty said, the Ray Lewis does look pretty real. It's hard to imagine that Toni Maynard, whoever that is, has so much access to so many athletes.

This whole dialogue makes me wonder how PSA/DNA and JSA make the initial determination whether a signature on a photo is real ink versus a photocopy. I can't imagine they do what I did by testing it with a Clic Eraser.

I take offense to this!! If you don't care for it, then please send it to me!! GO BLUE!!!

GO BLUE!

[Bossfan]

Originally Posted by jgmp123

I take offense to this!! If you don't care for it, then please send it to me!! GO BLUE!!!

GO BLUE!

In thanks for all the help I've gotten on this forum, I'd be happy to. I wanted a Montee Ball auto picture for my Badger daughter, so I bought a group of photos in an action lot that included Ball, Marqise Lee, and two Robinson photos. I'll PM you.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Deertick

So in other words, if you can erase them they are real?

Yes that is correct