The main reason that I am intriguied by it, is that I have a hypothesis that somewhat regularly, the originally signer had to thicken or go back over the signature when using fountain pen specifically on cards, because of the way ink adhered to the surface. It's not necessarily a bad thing, just what they did to make it more presentable.... typically this is the kind of thing that an authenticator would look for, patching, retracing, and then rule it out though. It happened to me once on a card signed in the thirties that I was 99.9 percent certain of for many reasons, but it displayed similar patching. I have been looking at countless examples like this on 1930s signed cards for the last couple years.
|