Are 1917 Collins-McCarthy Babe Ruth and 1921 Oxford Ruth real?
 

Are these cards real?

No good. They look like homemade repros. The print quality is poor and the E135 should have a glossy surface. The Oxford is a bit tricky because originals don't have a great print quality, but the ear pattern on that one is suspect as well.

Well, I own a Collins Mccarthy Ruth, so I will comment on that card. It doesn't look like mine does. When I look at the Ruth in the picture, it sure looks like toner residue. All the E135 cards I see have a much cleaner picture, even ones that have dirt residue on the card. If I had to vote, I'd say no. But I'm far from an expert and don't have a well-trained eye to spot fakes.

...as posted in the B/S/T thread...

I'm going to go with ... No, it is not.

It looks like a forgery was created from the Ruth that was sold in REA 2008 sale. Look at the locations of the creases (lower left portion of image, the two on the top including across the face, and the one on the right arm). Additionally, look at the black dot above the feet. I'm guessing that card would fluoresce if held against a black light.

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...86.html#photos

With the suspiciously near perfectly rounded corners on the Collins-McCarthy, I'm guessing no. Also, something doesn't look quite right about the card-stock. It should be a thinner stock, and judging from those corners, I'd think that's probably a thicker stock(just a guess from the photo's though) The card would typically have more of a yellowish tone, rather than a gray. I picked up a lot of about 12 severely trimmed and clipped Collins-McCarthy's a while back and kept 3 of 'em. Pipp, Judge and Merkle.

Don't know much about the Oxford, but I'm leaning towards no as well. Especially If you got them from the same person.

I would say definitely not real on the Oxford and most likely not real on the Collins McCarthy.

'17 and '21
 

no good.
well argued and articulated above.

best,
barry