The photos are good enough. There's nothing errant with wanting credit. I'd like credit if I provided photos of my stuff for someone's article and most people like to see their names in print. I just know that in the past a few people have asked that they not be credited. So I ask.
As far as Scott's comments go, the article is about all angles and sides of provenance documentation, the positive aspects (of which there are many, including some that many sports collectors don't realize) and the limitations. It doesn't dismiss the possibility that someone like Scott can forge a letter of provenance for his Mother Teresa/Elvis Presley/Shemp Howard signed original vinyl copy of The White Album or Vatican gift shop sales receipt for his first edition copy of the Old Testament signed by the author. And, of course, the number of eBay fakes "discovered in grandmother's cabinet" has become a running joke in the vintage baseball card hobby.
Anyone who's seen the classic 1980s British historical sit com Blackadder may remember the scene where the Middle Ages Bishop of Canterberry and his assistants were talking about their sales of fake religious artifacts to the public. They had for sale Jesus' fingers (in boxes of five, several boxes for sale) and Joan of Arc's bra.
Duly note the article is largely about the importance of documenting provenance.
Last edited by drcy; 04-03-2014 at 01:42 PM.
|