Brooklyn CDV

smokelessjoe · #1 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 · #2 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 · #3 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 · #4 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.

oldjudge · #5 01-16-2013, 02:15 PM

Corey makes an excellent suggestion. If the consignor/auction house is not worried about what Paul might find I don't know why they would not agree to this.

yanks12025 · #6 01-16-2013, 02:31 PM

Once it sells, it's out their hands. So if it's fake, tough luck. I still don't get why the guy who found it and listed it on ebay, received all these high offers while it was on ebay and then sells it to a friend for im guessing alot less then what he was offered on ebay.

In general i don't under the "as-is" in auctions. If you're selling something, say a Babe Ruth signed ball. And it turns out not to be a Babe Ruth ball, then it was false advertising.

E93 · #7 01-16-2013, 02:36 PM

With all due respect, I think this topic has run its course. I believe SRA have done their due diligence. If the winner choses to have further tests done that determine it to not be period, they can sue to get their money back if it comes to that. I doubt it would. Let's move it.
JimB

MGHPro · #8 01-16-2013, 02:41 PM

Troy has gone above and beyond what most auction houses would do. He got it authenticated by a well respected grading company, offers plenty of time to preview and will even allow you to bring a professional with you to evaluate it. I give Troy a major thumbs up for all of his work and handling himself in a professional manner.

if Lelands never passed on the item and it surfaced in an SGC case, would we really be having this conversation? 99% of auction houses sell as-is where is.. It is stated in black and white. If you really have concerns about the item, don't bid.. that's all. I wouldn't buy an item for 10k or 20k or 100k unless I was pretty confident in it.

I think Troy should be cut some slack and let's see what it does in auction.
Matt

bmarlowe1 · #9 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 · #10 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 · #11 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.

oldjudge · #12 01-16-2013, 03:33 PM

Chris--are you saying that there were two different negatives?

atx840 · #13 01-16-2013, 03:43 PM

There is definitely a difference..whatever that means..

atx840 · #14 01-16-2013, 03:49 PM

Can I get a higher res scan of the other known example?

Runscott · #15 01-16-2013, 05:32 PM

...

smokelessjoe · #16 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 · #17 01-16-2013, 05:44 PM

...

Runscott · #18 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.

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