Posted By:
HankronSome are obvious reprints, some are more deceptive. With the 1887 Allen & Ginter you can actually see the half-tone dot pattern in the image (The A & G's don't have such dots).
While skipping my usual diatribe, I wish to touch on one point, and hope that new buyers will use it a platform to common sense assesment of auctions. A number of the cards are obviously trimmed (repeat: obviously), some with crooked cuts and some with clipped corners, yet the seller does not mention this trimming. As I have discussed it in the past, I won't go into the reasons why this is usually sure sign that a card is a counterfit. I do, however, ask the questions: If a seller is offering an obviously trimmed card and does not mention it (due to incompetence or other reason), why would you want to bid in his or her auction? Further, how does apparent missing of the obvious reflect on his or her ability to make assesment of other important qualities (including authenticity, other alteration)?
My point here is that, irrelevent to a bidder's ability to judge authenticity from an image, I would think that even a beginning bidder would say, "With glasses off I can see that this card is trimmed. I think I'll bid in someone else's auctions."