Nice Article in SMR on Photo Collection of Board Member

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Mark, I just noticed your comment above. You and others need to understand that the guy who created/used this stamp, did not do it primarily to make laser copies of photos appear to be originals. He put it on the back of REAL TYPE I CONLON prints that did not have Conlon identification marks on them, to raise the value when he attempted to sell them to people who are focused on backstamps and not on actual images. I am always looking for Conlon prints, and if I had ever seen the stamp on the back of a forgery, it would have rang a bell. Honestly, I've only seen this backstamp on two photos out of all the Conlons I've seen, and both were mounted exactly like mine (the other looks good as well).

So I have a beautiful, real, Type I Conlon print that has this stamp on the back of it.

Just wanted to clear that up, as it resulted in me having to send a print back to a customer who was concerned (at first) that it was a forgery because of Ben's "stay away" comment, and then later, that it was not a photo by Conlon, which is dumbfounding to me, but no matter.

Until Ben posted about this backstamp, I had no idea that it was a bogus stamp.

Okay, carry on.

Scott,

My "stay away" comment was regarding the stamp I posted. I have not seen your photo in person nor did I know it was the one your customer was referring to.
The bad stamp was most likely applied to NON-TYPE 1 examples to pass as original Conlons. HOWEVER, I also explained that it is very possible "the stamper" would/could have stamped original copies as well not knowing any better and to raise the value.
I have no idea if yours is original as I have not seen it but it does have many signs pointing to being original based on scans/other example scans/what you told me.
I thought this was all addressed in another thread and put to bed but I guess not. I am sorry this caused you issues with your sale.. it was not intended obviously. I just wanted to make collectors aware of a bad stamp floating around as I do not want people to get taken. The last thing a growing hobby needs is for new buyers(anyone for that matter) to get burned.
If you have any other concerns on this topic, feel free to call or email me.

Thanks

Ben


Ben

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Scott,

My "stay away" comment was regarding the stamp I posted. I have not seen your photo in person nor did I know it was the one your customer was referring to.
The bad stamp was most likely applied to NON-TYPE 1 examples to pass as original Conlons. HOWEVER, I also explained that it is very possible "the stamper" would/could have stamped original copies as well not knowing any better and to raise the value.
I have no idea if yours is original as I have not seen it but it does have many signs pointing to being original based on scans/other example scans/what you told me.
I thought this was all addressed in another thread and put to bed but I guess not. I am sorry this caused you issues with your sale.. it was not intended obviously. I just wanted to make collectors aware of a bad stamp floating around as I do not want people to get taken. The last thing a growing hobby needs is for new buyers(anyone for that matter) to get burned.
If you have any other concerns on this topic, feel free to call or email me.

Thanks

Ben


Ben

Ben, I personally don't have any concerns at all about it. I was just clarifying Mark's comment and the assumptions that were made by my customer as a result of your comment. I have to disagree about the stamp being "most likely applied to NON TYPE I" photos, as I've never seen an example like that. It makes no sense to me that the 'applier' would put the stamp on Type I's with the bogus prints floating around in larger numbers - it would kill the value of his real Conlon Type I prints, which he was also stamping. No brain-surgeon, this guy.

As an aside, I received my mounted Conlon from my customer today, and peeling back the print just a little, I can see pencilled writing on the back (can't read it). Not sure if I'll attempt to remove it completely, but I'm tempted. Probably will see a PSA reject stamp on the back.

I've said this at least two times here, but I'm totally understanding that you didn't say my print was not a type I. Perception is important, and my customer had a perception that was incorrect - that's all.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Ben, I personally don't have any concerns at all about it. I was just clarifying Mark's comment and the assumptions that were made by my customer as a result of your comment. I have to disagree about the stamp being "most likely applied to NON TYPE I" photos, as I've never seen an example like that. It makes no sense to me that the 'applier' would put the stamp on Type I's with the bogus prints floating around in larger numbers - it would kill the value of his real Conlon Type I prints, which he was also stamping. No brain-surgeon, this guy.

As an aside, I received my mounted Conlon from my customer today, and peeling back the print just a little, I can see pencilled writing on the back (can't read it). Not sure if I'll attempt to remove it completely, but I'm tempted. Probably will see a PSA reject stamp on the back.

I've said this at least two times here, but I'm totally understanding that you didn't say my print was not a type I. Perception is important, and my customer had a perception that was incorrect - that's all.

Ok Scott. Everything g I have said is factual and true. You didn't know it was a fake stamp and now you do. Therefore, I will assume that is more valuable to you than getting a photo returned that you are happy to receive back.
As far as fake stamps being applied to non type 1s and not understanding that: I am not sure what else to tell you other than it makes the most sense. A stamp is applied to something worth next to nothing in order to make it worth substantially more/something. There have been many more of these than the two examples shown in these threads. They are the majority.
Again... If you are still unclear, give me a call.
Ps: remove the photo!! I wanna see

[Runscott]

.......