Brooklyn CDV

Saco River Auction · #1 01-16-2013, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runscott

That is incorrect.

I hate to get involved in this discussion again, but this has been bugging me for a while.

Going to a vintage photography expert such as Paul Messier, was the correct move. You've mentioned your fears that the item will be damaged or destroyed by forensic testing. Mr. Messier is an avid 19th century albumen collector (as you have alluded to). Why would he offer tests of 19th century albumens that would be damaging or destructive? Did he tell you that these tests could result in damage?

Here are Messier's Terms and conditions....

1. Client has delivered to Messier certain photographs (the �Photos�) as described on page 1 and illustrated and by this
reference incorporated herein for all purposes. Client hereby represents and warrants to Messier that Client has all legal right
and power to authorize Messier to conduct the Services (as described in Part 2 below) with respect to the Photos. Client shall
remain liable for the risk of loss to the Photos.

2. Client has engaged Messier to conduct the following analytical services (the �Services�) with respect to the Photos to
determine the nature of the materials and the methods of manufacture of the Photos as described on page 1. The client has
waived and disclaims all claims and causes of action against Messier with respect to any damage caused to the Photos by the
performance of the Services.

If it is not possible to damage items during a forensic examination, then why is it in the terms and conditions.

Now as a business that is charged with selling an item that does not belong to us, why would you take a risk. If this card is damaged during the testing, who foots the bill to the consignor. Who calls the consignor and tells him that his once very valuable piece is now damaged and worthless. These are true concerns that none of you are willing to consider, yet you want us to make rash decisions or do forensic testing that we do not feel is warranted and is potentially dangerous to a historic piece. You can discuss this all you want, but the bottom line is this...terms and conditions are put forth based on incidents that have happened in the past, whether with Mr. Messier or other forensic examiners....so the risk is real, otherwise there would be no need for that kind off language in the terms and conditions.

Troy

Runscott · #2 01-16-2013, 12:56 PM

As you know, what you just quoted was standard stuff that is put in any contract that involves an item leaving the hands of the owner. I assume you agreed to those terms before ANY testing was done.

Paul Messier hasn't said anything to the contrary, so other than his accidentally dropping the item, or having some sort of seizure and losing control of his equipment, forensic testing is done all the time and is safe (e.g-the Mona Lisa, etc.)

Runscott · #3 01-16-2013, 01:07 PM

Question to collectors on this board:

If someone won any photographic item at auction, sent it to Mr. Messier for image and binder testing, and the item came back as a forgery, what are your legal rights? If Mr. Messier is the same person who tested the item in the first place, and he stated explicitly what additional tests could be performed, I think I know the answer.

If the answer is what I think it is, then no one has anything to worry about.

smokelessjoe · #4 01-16-2013, 01:32 PM

Scott,

What scares me about your ideas regarding this is that if I follow your logic than I cannot trust or believe For Certain that any of the photos YOU own are real. Unfortunately at this time it is a fact that all of the photos you own could be fake. That is a fact and will remain a fact until you have this fiber analysis/testing done on everyone of them.

At this point, if you have any or put any photos up for sale I cannot buy from you. It's nothing personal - I just cannot trust you.... I need forensic proof

Scott, please hit me up if you ever do decide to sell something that is not fake... Of course include the proper documentation that I mentioned above - otherwise happy hunting!

Shawn

oldjudge · #5 01-16-2013, 01:45 PM

Shawn- other than the fact that this is a rather expensive item, and Scott is not now trying to sell anything,

smokelessjoe · #6 01-16-2013, 01:52 PM

Well, we have certainly talked about more expensive (relative word) items than this before and instead of using Scott, use Bob, Jake, Cyrus etc...

It is a shame to realize though that every photo that Scott owns is possibly a fake.

Jaybird · #7 01-16-2013, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smokelessjoe

Scott,

What scares me about your ideas regarding this is that if I follow your logic than I cannot trust or believe For Certain that any of the photos YOU own are real. Unfortunately at this time it is a fact that all of the photos you own could be fake. That is a fact and will remain a fact until you have this fiber analysis/testing done on everyone of them.

At this point, if you have any or put any photos up for sale I cannot buy from you. It's nothing personal - I just cannot trust you.... I need forensic proof

Scott, please hit me up if you ever do decide to sell something that is not fake... Of course include the proper documentation that I mentioned above - otherwise happy hunting!

Shawn

No one is required to do anymore testing. Scott isn't and the auction house isn't for the items they sell. There may be a negative impact in the final sale price however if the burden of proof is not met. You won't buy from Scott but others will. Same thing with this piece. It doesn't eliminate the sale, it just might exclude some buyers.

If the auction house's job is to get maximum dollars for the piece, they should endeavor to broaden the audience and not exclude anyone. Their choice, of course, as to how far they are willing to go.

bmarlowe1 · #8 01-16-2013, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smokelessjoe

Scott,
What scares me about your ideas regarding this is that if I follow your logic than I cannot trust or believe For Certain that any of the photos YOU own are real. Unfortunately at this time it is a fact that all of the photos you own could be fake. That is a fact and will remain a fact until you have this fiber analysis/testing done on everyone of them.
Shawn

Shawn - Spending many dozens of hours or much more (or paying someone else a large amount of money) to acquire the needed materials and then create a convincing forgery does not make economic sense for low or medium priced photos. Thus materials testing for such photos is not usually needed. Visual inspection by an experienced person is enough.

It does make economic sense to create an expensively made forgery for a $50k plus photo. In such cases materials testing should be expected by the collecting community. That fact that this may not be the view of most everyone is an indication of why collectors sometimes get what they deserve. Corey's lawsuit should be required reading.

smokelessjoe · #9 01-16-2013, 03:18 PM

Mark,

I do here your pain & your points lend themselves to an approach that only works with thieves with common sense. (to a certain degree)

You do have idiot thieves who make high-end forgeries of low end items - but wait a minute, maybe that makes them smart thieves...

Unfortunately Mark, your comment only works in the scenario you played out - that is not reality though... Very convincing forgeries Have been made for low or medium priced items and proved to be quite profitable.

Your comments still do not change the fact though that until materials testing is done on any photo, one cannot prove that it is not a fake regardless of the value.

Also, thousands of Expensive photos have been sold at BIG auctions over the years... I have never seen a chemical analysis in any of the auction catalogues nor do I recall us "Net54" ever crying out for one to be done?

atx840 · #10 01-16-2013, 03:27 PM

I have no clue on this item but its gotten enough attention I figured I would take a look. This is based off a very low res scan but as best as I can align the two the wood paneling does not line up, looks like a slight adjustment of the photographer to the right in the SRA version.

Runscott · #11 01-16-2013, 05:32 PM

...

smokelessjoe · #12 01-16-2013, 05:41 PM

You are correct Scott and that would be true for you as well. Glad you brought that up & clarified.

Runscott · #13 01-16-2013, 05:44 PM

...

Runscott · #14 01-16-2013, 07:51 PM

Even if there were two negatives, the same resolution questions exist as before.

It's also interesting that there might be a stereoview card of this image out there somewhere.

ScottFandango · #15 01-18-2013, 11:18 AM

was REA given a crack at selling this?

mcadams · #16 01-19-2013, 02:45 PM

1) One thing NOT emphasized much on this thread was anyone's views of Lelands. I don't know how you could read all of the posts here and not have a slighly lowered opinion of the team there. I get that no one is perfect, but the opinions offered by Lelands staff as to why they chose not to accept the item appear to be somewhat comical at this point, especially in light Messier's comments.

2) Troy- I wish all Auction Houses were as responsive as you were. Your efforts are to be applauded.

3) Troy- There was some particularly good advice here that you brushed aside. There was a path toward an A+ job, but you didn't go there for some reason. It was clear that no one here agreed that damage was even remotely possible with forensic testing on the mount. Had you taken that step, you could have really created a magnificent reputation for this item and your increased the prestige of your auction house going forward.

4) Troy- I think Leon was trying to provide some helpful advice regarding re-gluing SGC holders (We don't do that....ever.) While he was trying to be helpful, you got very defensive, and in my opinion lacked a little professionalism in your response. The collector's here, like you, want the auction to generate great results. No need to take everything so personally.

5) I am VERY curious to see how REA, Bill Goodwin, SCP, Greg Bussineau, or others would respond if they were asked to take a similar item to Messier etc. for further authentication after it had been slabbed. I hope Troy's persistence was widely noticed and has set a new standard for Auction House responsiveness.

Saco River Auction · #17 01-29-2013, 11:07 AM

The card is at SGC being put in a new holder. It will be back on Weds January 30th.

Troy

benjulmag · #18 01-16-2013, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

Here are Messier's Terms and conditions....

1. Client has delivered to Messier certain photographs (the �Photos�) as described on page 1 and illustrated and by this
reference incorporated herein for all purposes. Client hereby represents and warrants to Messier that Client has all legal right
and power to authorize Messier to conduct the Services (as described in Part 2 below) with respect to the Photos. Client shall
remain liable for the risk of loss to the Photos.

2. Client has engaged Messier to conduct the following analytical services (the �Services�) with respect to the Photos to
determine the nature of the materials and the methods of manufacture of the Photos as described on page 1. The client has
waived and disclaims all claims and causes of action against Messier with respect to any damage caused to the Photos by the
performance of the Services.

If it is not possible to damage items during a forensic examination, then why is it in the terms and conditions.

Now as a business that is charged with selling an item that does not belong to us, why would you take a risk. If this card is damaged during the testing, who foots the bill to the consignor. Who calls the consignor and tells him that his once very valuable piece is now damaged and worthless. These are true concerns that none of you are willing to consider, yet you want us to make rash decisions or do forensic testing that we do not feel is warranted and is potentially dangerous to a historic piece. You can discuss this all you want, but the bottom line is this...terms and conditions are put forth based on incidents that have happened in the past, whether with Mr. Messier or other forensic examiners....so the risk is real, otherwise there would be no need for that kind off language in the terms and conditions.

Troy

Troy,

What about the following?

The winning bidder shall have the option at the conclusion of the auction to have the CdV sent to Mr. Messier for the additional testing. If the winning bidder declines to accept this option, then he/she will have no further recourse against Saco Auctions if the item is later shown to be a fake. If, though, the winning bidder exercises the option, upon Saco Auctions being paid for the item it will send it to Mr. Messier for the additional testing. If this testing determines the item is a fake through the presence of substances that were not commercially available in the 19th century, Saco Auctions will refund the purchase price to the winning bidder as well as be responsible for the additional testing expenses. If the testing does not so establish the item is a fake, then the winning bidder shall be responsible for paying the additional testing expenses and agrees to accept all risks associated with the testing.

So under this scenario Saco Auctions incurs no risk the additional testing might damage the item unless it is proven to be a fake. Then, even if the testing damages the CdV, what will have been damaged is something with no value to start with.

Saco River Auction · #19 01-16-2013, 02:25 PM

The ownership has declined to do anything further or to enter into any side contracts or agreements with the buyer. As we said in our post yesterday, this has ramifications beyond this one item and we are not willing to set a precedence on this item, which could involve us entering into side agreements for additional forensic testing on thousands of items every year. Yes this is a unique item and very valuable, but we sell lots of valuable items. It is up to the buyer to know what he or she is buying. Most auctions have the same rules. We have invited all of you to Maine to look at the thing yourselves....bring an expert, spend as long as you need with it, this is work that is your responsibility as buyers, to ensure that you feel good about your purchase. It is still available for viewing anytime. We suggest that if your are going to bid on this, it is worth the drive or flight to do this. Also for my signed up bidders, Paul Messier is going to be available for phone calls, through me, next week. He will be delighted to answer any questions you may have. This is all we are willing to do on this. Despite what has been written, we have in fact taken extreme measures on this and have logged hundreds of man hours on this project. We have done our part.

Troy

oldjudge · #20 01-16-2013, 02:37 PM

Troy-at this point "looking" at the card does no good. There is no reason for anyone to go to Maine. If you can't take the card out of the holder and have it tested, there is nothing left to determine. The photo is albumen and we know what the card looks like. The question remains as to whether the binder is period. "Looking" through a plastic holder won't tell you that.

Jim-with all due respect, if you are tired of this thread, don't click on it.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
T206 SGC Graded Brooklyn Team Set 23 out of 27 Cards SOLD SOLD!!!	brookdodger55	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	3	03-31-2012 06:15 PM
Looking for Brooklyn Dodger Collectors	dougscats	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	0	12-27-2010 05:19 PM
Looking for Brooklyn Dodgers collectors	dougscats	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	11-24-2010 12:16 PM
FS: RARE Ca. 1860's CDV Civil War Generals and Officers featuring Abner Doubleday SGC Auth	Archive	19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T	0	09-06-2008 07:07 PM
Early Baseball CDV	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	11	07-25-2004 11:24 PM