No opinion on the ball as I'm not much of an autograph collector. But I like reading these threads because I find it interesting how confident people are declaring signatures bad. Often done with such authority that no accompanying explanation is required. Just the word "bad" itself. I don't say that to offend, I just think it's funny.
There seems to be an expectation of precision that would be hard for a machine to replicate never mind a human being. How do you account for being tired or rushed or drunk or in a bad mood or having a sore hand or getting old or countless other considerations.
Judging autographs, including paid certification, seems very arbitrary to me and more than a little dubious. I find it's always best to trust your own opinion and if you think it's good, go for it. Unless you're standing in front of the person when they sign it, nobody will really ever know, with 100% certainty, one way or the other.
|