I was waiting to see if Rhys would clarify, but quoting from his earlier post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by prewarsports
I dont think save a few that the "Conlon" was written by Charles Conlon but I do know for a fact that at least the ones I have came that way direct from the Sporting News.
|
seems to me that when he says "direct from the Sporting News" he's not talking about "by way of John Rogers."
Either way though, if you're going to be calling out a major outfit like Rogers and his team for fraud, you need to have more to back up your argument than "well, he could have done it" and
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Young
I have noticed both fake signatures AND fake stamps which, I believe, get photos directly from the same team
|
Again, I will remind you that John Rogers has several THOUSAND original Conlon glass plate negatives at his disposal, and several MILLION vintage photos to boot, with many many many better quality shots than those shown here. Not only does it not make sense for him to have faked a Conlon signature on the back of less-than-Conlon-quality photos and not call attention to the signature on the back in the hopes that someone will see it and bid a little more in an auction, but if he were going to try to fake Conlon photos, he has far better material at his disposal to do so. These are not the 4 to 5-figure Ruth photos we're talking about here. I really don't see any "damning evidence" having been presented yet, and while it is
possible that
someone is adding fake Conlon sigs, I really don't think Rogers is the one doing it.