Leon and Terry-- help me avoid disaster and spot fakes.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd (nolemmings)

Leon and Terry posted in a different thread how they got stuck with fakes/reprints-- an Old Judge and Brunners. Guys, and anyone else with help, I would appreciate if you could describe how the cards differ from authentic examples. It would be great if you could post a scan of any fake/reprint along with an explanation of what makes it unauthentic. I know the board routinely points out scams and fakes on E-Bay, but to those folks who actually ended up with these bad boys, I would like to see 'em and how close they are to the real thing.
Thanks. Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I will post my fake Brunners tonight....if you hold the card in your hand it just doesn't feel right, the cardstock is too "white", and the card has an even sheen to it when you hold it sideways to the light...not good characteristics of a vintage card...best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Let's take it a step further. If you all will send me scans of "fake vs real" issues, and the characteristics Todd is asking for, I will write it up in an article format, giving all contributers credit, and distribute - would probably also be a good "board contribution" to VCBC.

I'll work on the t206's.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

that apply to multiple issues would also be good - maybe David Rudd could write up something.

[Archive]

Posted By: Andy Baran

This link may be helpful

http://www.caramel-cards.com/other.html#reprint

[Archive]

Posted By: hankron

This applies to online viewing and not in person examination. In person, most counterfeits and reprints are obvious to anyone with experience with the cards. As I've already mentioned before, the collector of early cards or photos should get a blacklight. A blacklight will quickly and easily identify many modern counterfeits due to the bright fluoresence.

1) Most sellers on eBay are honest and essentially good people. When most people sell a fake, it is accidental and they offer a refund and an apology. When it is pointed out that an item in auction is significantly misrepresented, the seller will amend or remove the auction, and thank you for the help.

2) When viewed online: Most reprints have viewable deficiencies that, at the least, makes a bidder think twice.

Many homemade counterfeits have obvious trimming that iis described as ‘natural wear.’ One of the hardest things to produce on these types of counterfeits is natural corner rounding. They often clip off the corners with a scissors and rough up the edge a bit. While there are genuine cards with obvious trimming (crooked edges and clipped corners), a legitimate seller would not mistake it for ‘natural corner rounding.’ If a seller can’t tell the difference between obvious trimming and natural wear, STAY AWAY. I bet you that every single ‘Library of Congress’ counterfeit ever offered on eBay or Yahoo had problems with the cut that was obvious just looking at the image.

Even in an online image, many commercially produced T206 and other reprints are apparent to anyone who’s handled the real thing and often to those who’ve only seen a lot of them online. Often the reprints simply don’t look right. The experienced collector’s eyes are a sophisticated tool. Avoid high end 1933 Goudeys with conveniently placed scrapes on the back-— meaning, where the reprint text would be on a reprint.

On or offline, I've never seen a reprint of a T206 Honus Wagner that didn't look like a reprint of a T206 Honus Wagner. It doesn't matter how long he baked it in the oven or sent it throught the washing machine or steeped in the afternoon pot of Earl Grey or how poor the scan, it always looks like a reprint of a Honus Wagner.

Many reprints of significant cards, especially the T206s and E-cards and real photo cards (Old Judge, Fatima, etc), will have an incorrect moiré pattern.

3) Why the on earth would someone selling an Old Judge Cap Anson picture the card at a 25 degree angle? This is known as the ‘Give me a break’ effect.

4) Most intentional sellers of counterfeits, usually of expensive cards, have serious deficiencies in their description. Never ever buy an expensive card from someone who says “sold as is”, “may be real or reprint, I’m no expert” or similar.

5) Ask the seller what is the return policy and guarantee of authenticity. If he or she won’t offer a guarantee of authenticity or reasonable return policy, DO NOT BID. Check the bidder’s feedback and what else they are selling.

6) If you have concerns about a card, get your concerns answered before bidding.

7) Why on God’s green earth would someone bid $2,000 on a 1933 Babe Ruth Goudey from someone with feedback of 0?

8) If anyone reading this post ever bids $1,000 in an auction of a Old Judge Cap Anson pictured at a 25 degree angle, with clipped corners described as ‘natural corner wear’ from a 0 feedback seller who claims “May be real, may not be real, I’m no expert” and “sold as is”, I’m will personally come over to your house and smack you.

9) If you have a question about the card, post it to the board. I can think of no better use for this board than addressing these types of issues.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Pete is certainly the expert, but I think the "Cobb vs Cobb" example is a little bit misleading, though I'm sure not intentional.

If you compare the images, you can see little "hexagon-like" areas of color combinations in the reprinted Cobb. While the Cobb in his example is definitely a reprint, don't be mislead to think that these "hexagon-like" areas don't appear on other caramel cards (and Pete knows this - I'm just clarifying). In fact, they are common in the following example of a real Reulbach from the same e95 set as the Cobb in Pete's example:

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

<<8) If anyone reading this post ever bids $1,000 in an auction of a Old Judge Cap Anson pictured at a 25 degree angle, with clipped corners described as ‘natural corner wear’ from a 0 feedback seller who claims “May be real, may not be real, I’m no expert” and “sold as is”, I’m will personally come over to your house and smack you.>>

LOL <g>

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd (nolemmings)

Just wondering if I must have a 40X scope, or will a 12-15x loupe do? Also, does the magnification distort the color of your scan-- I think my Reulbach is a little more purple in hue. Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Mine is actually darker, but basically the same color - it could be a function of your computer settings, or the ink color in the background could be slightly different. I have had two Reulbachs and they were both the same color.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Scott, just so you know, you may have fooled everyone else, but you didn't fool everyone.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Please explain. If I said something ignorant, send me an email and I'll correct it. Thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

So simply say what's on your mind. After all, you are the expert - spit it out.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

even a low power magnifying glass (4x) will catch the dot pattern in the white borders...also, there is a "shine" to the fake one...and the back is too "white"....hope this helps a little....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

For the record, I honestly thought Scott was doing a joke, and if I had thought he was serious I would have kept this whole issue off board. Scott is someone I know and respect, and I wasn't trying to show up anyone.

I had and have serious issues with the scan provided. However, I have only seen a single closeup shot of a part of a card and am not about pass final judgement without seeing the card in person. To that end, I have requested to have the card mailed to me. I am well aware that scanners can do goofy things, and, if you scan an item three times each picture can be slightly different. Some people will enlare a picture to the point that you don't know what's a detail on the real object and what's a pixel. In no circumstances can an object be authenticated from a snapshot photo or digital image, especially when it shows only a portion of the item.

The E95 cards and similar T and E cards were made with an old fashioned type of lithography that has qualities that do not exist in reprints. The original cards were colored lithographs versus color lithographs. Colored versus color is not a mere technicality or mere play on words. Also, the ink used was different than is used today, and this ink is identified under a high power microscope. The later fact again indicates why I can't and won't pass final judgement on a card's authenticity without me personally viewing it through a microscope.

I don't mean to come across as arogant, but I am confident that I know more about these issues than anyone else including the grading card companies and the auction houses. I am also aware that sometimes online images lie or are otherwise deceptive and, when an item is viewed in person, the original confidence or doubts are squelched. I will readily admit that my first impression was wrong, if in person examination shows that the card is authentic.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

If it helps any, here is a closeup of another real E95 Reulbach. It looks basicly the same, except Scotts is scanned a little lighter. Notice the overprint on the ear in both cards, its almost the same as well. Oh well, very interesting looking at these cards at such a closeup, its new to me. Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...to make a fortune from reprinting e95 Ed Reulbach cards. I think whoever did this might have pulled it off if they had left the cards in better condition - but scratching them up, sanding down the corners, and adding very realistic stains was a bad, bad idea.

But seriously (the previous paragraph was a JOKE, a JOKE son , I have pulled David's leg before and admittedly this one looked like the same - now I've become the "boy who cried wolf" and can no longer ask David a serious question! No one knows about this except David, but I forged a color certificate from the 1850's and sent it to David as an unidentified "gift". He passed the test of course.

David is right that he knows more about this stuff than anyone around...perhaps the modern use of this type of print pattern simply began earlier than we thought.

David - I'll send you several examples after I get my Cobb back (e95 Reulbach, e103 Lord, unidentified "candy Cobb"). I would love your opinion on them. Thanks again.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

To illustrate that I'm well aware of the Doctor Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde nature of digital imaging, below is a link to one of my own auctions. The two unaltered images, with obviously different tones, were taken about 10 seconds apart.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=2860&item=1983079827

In my defence, my camera works best with bright sunlight and not with artificial indoor light. Anyone who knows where I live (Seattle), will figure out the problem.

For auctions, I will sometimes alter the image-- meaning cropping, lightening or darkening. Far from trying to deceive, this is because the original image doesn't resemble the actual I hold in my hand.

This is why you will often hear me say, "If you are in or plan on being in Seattle, I will be happy to look at it in person. Otherwise, I can't help you out."

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Just so there is no confusion in anyone's mind, I have not made any opinion whatsoever on the authenticity or lack thereof of the Reulbach card-- and it shouldn't be interpreted that I am calling it a fake. What happened is that Scott wanted to send me some other items to look at, and I simply suggested that, while he was at it, he should send the Reulbach. I've known Scott for some time, and know that he's smart guy with good judgement of authenticity.

Often times when I ask to see an item in person, the person will automatically interpret it as a bad sign-- like when someone gets a call to see the the Doctor and automatically assumes it's cancer. Most of the time, I simply want to see the item in person-- and more often than not, the turns out to be authentic.

Even if it was Rob Lifson's or Lew Lipset's or Bob Lemke's card, I would still want to see with my own eyes.

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

Do we have a final verdict?

Are the print patterns in the two Reubach cards above indicative of reprinting? I am asking because my E95 Reuback also has the same hexagon print pattern on the player's face.

[Archive]

Posted By: nolemmings (Todd)

I see a pattern developing (no pun intended). Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

The "hex" print pattern appeared on some e95's, but not all - my Wagner doesn't have it. I don't know when the "hexes" started appearing on cards, but I'm guessing it was very, very close to 1909 since there were a lot of issues that year and some have it and some don't.

Just my opinion - I'm no lithograph expert, but the facts say a lot in this case.