Poll: Help Me Decide Which Wheat to Keep
 

Hi All,

I acquired two lovely Zack Wheat signed 3x5 cards together as part of an auction lot.

I'd like to keep the better one, and I believe a collector friend of mine will happily take the one I decide to let go.

They are both really nice IMO, but I'd like your thoughts on which one is the keeper (you feel is a better 'graph).

Wheat #1 (SGC # ends -036) is better centered on the card, but the "h" does not form a neat closed loop and the "W" does not link to the "h".

Wheat #2 (SGC # ends -037) is a bit off centre to the left on the card, but IMO the letter construction is more typical of the better examples of Wheat's signature.

Your opinions - and votes in the poll - would be valued!

Cheers,

Blair

My vote is purely from the aesthetic view with no knowledge of other Wheats and what exemplifies his auto better.

#1 looks better because it is centered and the card looks cleaner.

I would go with the bottom signature. The whole signature seems bolder and the "k" in Zack is better formed, and the "Wh" transition / connector in Wheat is more complete and flowing and formed than in the top one. Centering in this case would not bother me, I am looking at quality of signature , in my opinion , only.

Before reading your post all the way through, I looked at the cards and chose #1. Then I read that you think #2 is a better representation of his signature. If that's the case, then I'd choose the signature quality of #2 over the slightly better centering of #1.

+1

As far as what was more 'typical', I tend to go with signatures that are not typical. This Wheat, for instance, is appealing to me simply because it is different from how he normally signed.

Number One

Thanks for the votes and comments so far guys - please keep them coming!

Cheers,
Blair

Wheat
 

I like the second one better. The h in Wheat is complete in the second one. Both are nice.

Number 2 because the Z is more natural in flow, and less forced.