Online databases and checklists are nice but you need to have multiple sources sometimes to figure out if something exists or not. Same with print too but it's a different game online. Some classic references had intentional errors to prevent plagiarism but online it seems like an attempt to profit by getting a variation into the PSA database is the goal.
Something like a relatively unknown 1968 checklist variation would be available in enough quantity to determine if real or not after some cursory investigation but some legit ones just escape detection until someone inadvertently notices something. Photoshop really makes things difficult, especially given the usual low-res online environment.
Last edited by toppcat; 04-14-2020 at 06:38 AM.
|