Making the purists cringe
 

I know a lot of collectors cringe when they see "custom cuts", but I think sometimes they can be quite attractive. I think a lot of times, people can take this hobby way too seriously. Collect what is fun and attractive to you, and enjoy the ride. Most of the items we collect are not the Magna Carta :)

Here's a Cobb I recently picked up from Stinson:

http://i867.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps0fc717b9.jpg

Here's a custom cut I'm having made from it (not everyone's cup of tea, but it works for me)

http://i867.photobucket.com/albums/a...psc0ff9e03.jpg

Mike,
That looks nice. I think the main point is that you are not "cutting" up anything with historical significance really. The signed piece in its current state is already cut so to speak. If you like nuttin' wrong with that.

I'm not one for cutting stuff, but in this case it's very very nice and well done.

Ditto

My objection with the card companies is when the don't show the full signature (Ted Willams = ed Willia"), when they cut up a full item like letter, contract or check, and then it looks butt ugly.

Your is cut, but from an already cut out picture, and it's nicely done. You have talent.

I agree, nothing wrong with using a cut for a cut. It's typically the act of destroying something whole to create the cut in the first place that will draw jeers and criticism. By mounting your cut (that was already a cut) in a card, you're basically making a choice on how to present it for viewing/display (more akin to framing a photograph), and you've done quite a nice job of it from the look of your mock-up. Is this something that you designed yourself and are sending to someone for execution, or was the design done by the "card builder" as well? Just curious. (Also, is there a better term than "card builder" that I should use?)

I'm not taking a stand one way or the other, but...

That's not a "cut." It's a signed magazine or book photo. (And I'm sure Jim listed it accordingly.)

I think it looks great and deciding how to display acquisitions is a hobby within a hobby.

I would get rid of that 1/1 up in the corner, though. That card company hucksterism isn't necessary with a personal, custom cut, but that's just my opinion. I like everything else about it.

Sweet Cobb!

By cut, I meant cut out picture. The Cobb pic had already been cut out of something long before he got it. As opposed to him cutting the signature off a whole postcard or full bank check.

I'll be careful in my future use of the term cut.

That looks nice Mike!

I have no problem with this... whatever makes you happy as a collector... it's all good.

What would bug me personally, is that they had to just barely cut off the left side of the paraph. They never seem able to quite get the entire autograph in for some reason. Just my personal pet-peeve. Looks really nice otherwise!

oh, the card builder definitely wasn't me. I'm not that patient or talented enough, LOL. It's a guy that goes by "knuckles" on some other boards. He makes some neat "custom cuts"

mike

Mike, that piece is well done & a keeper. Garret does great work.

Agreed. I wouldn't mess with the original signed item at all, but if you are going to, my suggestions would be to remove the 1/1, and I would also take off the 'HOF-1936' part, maybe replace with the years he played. After all, everyone knows he made the HOF.

Very tastefully done.