Please help, fake or real Babe Ruth

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by glchen

Does not necessarily determine if the wrapper is real or fake
-------------------------------------------------------
(1) Issues with the "H" in George H. Candy Co. Inc.

I think the obscured "H" is a huge red flag to stay away. I haven't seen one I believe to be fake that has the "H" intact. And the few that have been sold that appear to be real all have the "H".

If not having the luxury of examining one in hand to feel the paper and do a black light test, for me, the "H", the style of font, and positioning of the lettering are the most telling factors.

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

I think the obscured "H" is a huge red flag to stay away. I haven't seen one I believe to be fake that has the "H" intact. And the few that have been sold that appear to be real all have the "H".

If not having the luxury of examining one in hand to feel the paper and do a black light test, for me, the "H", the style of font, and positioning of the lettering are the most telling factors.

Phil,

With that understanding, would you say Legendary's is bad then??

[Mr. Zipper]

One other thing I just noticed...

On the lot bought to be authentic, the horizontal bar on the H is much higher than the horizontal bar in the suspect item.

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

One other thing I just noticed...

On the lot bought to be authentic, the horizontal bar on the H is much higher than the horizontal bar in the suspect item.

Yeah Steve, I noticed that too. I was the underbidder on this lot, but couldn't stay awake

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by gnaz01

Phil,

With that understanding, would you say Legendary's is bad then??

Greg, That would be my opinion.

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

One other thing I just noticed...

On the lot bought to be authentic, the horizontal bar on the H is much higher than the horizontal bar in the suspect item.

The font is different on all of the letters. That "H" with the high cross bar is where it is most obvious. That is my theory on why the "H" is obscured. It looks alot like the letter "M" due to the high cross bar. In the context of a word like "RUTH" it is not mistakable. However, standing alone as a middle initial I think it could have been mistaken and printed on the fakes as an "M". Once it was discovered, maybe it was easier to just obscure it and pass it off as artificial wear rather than correct and reprint them. Just a theory.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

That is my theory on why the "H" is obscured. It looks alot like the letter "M" due to the high cross bar. In the context of a word like "RUTH" it is not mistakable. However, standing alone as a middle initial I think it could have been mistaken and printed on the fakes as an "M". Once it was discovered, maybe it was easier to just obscure it and pass it off as artificial wear rather than correct and reprint them. Just a theory.

The same thought crossed my mind.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

I think the obscured "H" is a huge red flag to stay away. I haven't seen one I believe to be fake that has the "H" intact. And the few that have been sold that appear to be real all have the "H".

If not having the luxury of examining one in hand to feel the paper and do a black light test, for me, the "H", the style of font, and positioning of the lettering are the most telling factors.

The wrapper from HBroll that passed the black light test also has the ruined "H." Link. Do you think that one is also fake or is it possibly genuine, but that the general rule would be to stay away from wrappers would the obscured "H"?

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by glchen

The wrapper from HBroll that passed the black light test also has the ruined "H." Link. Do you think that one is also fake or is it possibly genuine, but that the general rule would be to stay away from wrappers would the obscured "H"?

I think the black light test is not fool proof. For one, new items can be printed on old paper. Also, modern wax and parchment paper do not react under black light as you might expect. See the below image of both with a modern 3x5 and a vintage postcard.

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

I think the black light test is not fool proof. For one, new items can be printed on old paper. Also, modern wax and parchment paper do not react under black light as you might expect. See the below image of both with a modern 3x5 and a vintage postcard.

The wax coating (coating modern paper) might play a role in this as well. I'm not sure how anyone could feel comfortable with a damaged H version at this point.

[glchen]

How's this for the revised recipe to give yourself the best chance to get an authentic example?

Before purchasing
-------------------------
(1) Make sure that the "H" in George H. Candy Co. Inc on the wrapper is not damaged.
(2) The description in the listing should mention that the wrapper is made of wax paper, and if it doesn't, at least it should not say the wrapper is made of paper, like a "postcard," or from a book
(3) Examine the color contrast between the light wax paper and the dark ink images of the graphics
(4) Look at the creases on the white border. If it is real wax paper the crease will actually break the wax and create a white line, but if it is printed on paper and made to look real the crease will just be a paper crease and not change the color of the item.
(5) Ideally, there should be fold lines where the chocolate would have been inside of wrapper.

After purchase
----------------
(1) Confirm that the wrapper is wax paper and not paper
(2) Perform the black light test. The wrapper should not light up.