 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13
12-06-2011, 05:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Let me start by saying that I don't really know anything about grading cards or determining whether or not a Ruth autograph is authentic. But, aside from the comparisons to known "real" autographs of Ruth, I would think that the surface properties of a vintage ball would change enough over a period of 70 or 80 years that a modern forgery might display some disparities in the interaction of the ink with the ball surface that could be examined and quantitated.
If this were true, some type of physical measurement (e.g., refractive index or absorption spectrum) would at least remove some of the subjectivity out of the process. Does anyone know if this kind of approach has ever been used? 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| What's the most interesting collection you've heard of that is not yours? | almostdone | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 08-07-2011 07:49 PM |
| Share an interesting fact about a t206 player | David R | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 46 | 10-18-2010 09:26 PM |
| Interesting & Funny 19th Century Baseball Stories | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 04-02-2009 07:21 PM |
| Interesting story regarding the T-206 Wagner | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 11-29-2007 06:27 PM |
| I saw three very interesting items today (N310 Anson, E90-1 Clarke, E103 Lajoie) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 24 | 11-18-2004 08:18 AM |
Threaded Mode