This Makes Me Cringe

[Leon]

TPGs shouldn't be doing this.....to me the picture is almost ruined.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ted-William...IAAOSwJjNcb3EO

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Leon

TPGs shouldn't be doing this.....to me the picture is almost ruined.

+1, but if card collectors can stomach all that stuff on the slabs surrounding their cards every time they look at them, this should be a relatively easy lift for photo collectors. Can't they put it on the back, though?

[Steve D]

I completely agree.

Any stickers should be put on the back, NOT on the front!

Steve

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Also makes me wonder how the first name is that faded and the last name is that smudged and he thinks he's going to get $250, but I guess that's a different issue.

For my Auction I have photos stickered on front because it seems the standard, but other items like magazines I try not to ruin the appearance and have it stickered elsewhere. What's the consensus should I have the photos stickered on the back going forward?

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Also makes me wonder how the first name is that faded and the last name is that smudged and he thinks he's going to get $250, but I guess that's a different issue.

For my Auction I have photos stickered on front because it seems the standard, but other items like magazines I try not to ruin the appearance and have it stickered elsewhere. What's the consensus should I have the photos stickered on the back going forward?

On the back absolutely unless there is some reason not to.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

On the back absolutely unless there is some reason not to.

+1
Hi Hank.

[johnts1]

I've seen some nice Mantle autographed photos for sale out there and they put the COA sticker right on the front. Why they do that, I've no idea. Kind of takes away from the picture. Put it on the back for goodness sakes.

[packs]

They ruined my Mickey too:

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

I gotta say, for some reason I hate it even more on magazines.

[1952boyntoncollector]

The sticker also covered a black pen spot and/or hole so it was welcomed by the submitter..

[packs]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

The sticker also covered a black pen spot and/or hole so it was welcomed by the submitter..

Not for me. I was the submitter. That's how I got it back.

[Ryan1125]

It's even worse when they don't get the sticker straight or have it way too high/low/etc. I have seen some absolutely awful sticker placements that completely ruin items for me IMO.

[bcookie]

I guess the sticker needs to be on the front as the submitter or future owner may want to frame them someday. If the sticker is on the back and the photo is professionally framed, you would need to compromise the frame job to verify authenticity.

[prewarsports]

The first person to ruin the value of that photo was Ted Williams when he signed it It is worth more unsigned.

[icollectDCsports]

I think the sticker should be larger, shinier, and placed closer to the autograph (preferably over the player's face) so that there is no doubt as to the authenticity of the signature. Yep, that should do it.

[itslarry]

Originally Posted by icollectDCsports

I think the sticker should be larger, shinier, and placed closer to the autograph (preferably over the player's face) so that there is no doubt as to the authenticity of the signature. Yep, that should do it.

What if they placed it over the auto? Here me out, it would prevent fading, smudging and tracing.

[garymc]

All my photos are a lot older and I always look to the backs for the history. The photographer stamps, agency stamps, sometimes baseball magazine holograms or auction stamps. It adds to the provenance ! No to the front !!!!


https://www.flickr.com/photos/151843...57704575151952

[Tom Hufford]

In my opinion, there is only one reason TPGers put a sticker on the front of a signed photo, album page, or other item - VANITY. I'm sure they see it as a form of advertising that they can put on and get the owner to pay for - but in my opinion it shows that they have absolutely no respect for the item.

Does anyone really think that 50 or 100 years from now anyone will know who/what PSA/DNA was, or be able to decipher the JSA signature on that sticker? Much less be able to check the item on the company's database?

I am almost 100% sure that if someone brought in the Mona Lisa to be authenticated by one of these companies, they would get it back with a sticker on the front.

I have never knowingly purchased an item with one of these stickers on the front, and see very few reasons why I ever would. And greater still, I can't imagine I would ever pay to have a single signature in my collection authenticated by one of these parties.