counterfeit azo postcards?

[Archive]

Posted By: jamie

i recently picked up a ruth rppc with an azo back. it looks slightly "off" though. the front is very glossy and the back looks like a stamp. is this at all consistent with period cards? any other warning signs here? have azo counterfeits surfaced before?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

how much do you want for it?

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Authentic "AZO" postcards are "real photo" postcards with a back that is an ink stamped postcard design.

The triangle "2up-2down" style stampbox is from the 1910-1930 era.

Ive owned 2 different AZO Ruth's... the "3 bat" pose (like yours) and the "bat extended" pose.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Here is a good site on dating REAL PHOTO Postcards

http://www.playle.com/realphoto/
(click on the "A" to see the AZO info)

[Archive]

Posted By: jamie

thanks guys- turned out to be a better pick-up than i thought. anyone have scans of the other two poses?

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Here are the 2 "AZO" cards I have owned (below). There is also an AZO "standing with Boston uniform" pose Ive seen a couple times.



I also have "P.R.C." and "Cyko" real photo postcards of Ruth from the same era.

[Archive]

Posted By: andy becker

jamie, you might want to pick up a copy of cycleback's photography handbook. it dicusses photsos, cdv's, postcards, cabinets, etc.

your postcard is a RPPC (real photo post card).

nice pick up, congrats.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

As already mentioned, the stambox text is consistant for the date. The AZO and other names
in the stamp box indicate a brand/type of photo paper, and if the collector is worried he
can purchase other cheap postcards with the same stamp box. The paper should generally
have similar thickness, feel, etc-- and most modern cardstock with faked stamping
would likely stand out. One could probably get a pile of old real photo
post cards will all sorts of stamp boxs for cheap, and own a small postcard
paper reference library.

Though not impossible, it would be difficult to take original blank AZO postcard
paper and make a new photo on it, as the paper and photochemicals on front have
likely dried out. Whether a professional or a hobbyist photographer, you want
to be making your photos on fresh photo paper, not stuff found in your great
grandfather's foot locker.

I would think that if someone was going to make a new fake AZO real photo postcard,
with a fake AZO stamp on back, what would give it away is the
distinctly different stock (probably thicker, perhaps obvoiusly newer) and that
the printing on back looked too new, fresh. For example, if you've collected
lots of real photo postcards, or even documents like contracts, you get a good
feel for old writing ink and stamps. A fake postmark from last Tuesday will
usually stand out as it simply looks brand new.

For the non-photo expert, if a real photo postcard has an appropriate stamp box
or postmark date and the image is real photo (not dots), that's most of the
battle, and usually indicates the postcard is genuine.

[Archive]

Posted By: Clinton

I used to get many postcard auction catalogs and one talks about AZO fake postcards involving highend cards of varying subjects. Yankee and Babe Ruth cards were specifically mentioned. This catalog was issued in 1999. Here are some of the signs they said to look for.

All examples display uneven or ragged trim around the margins, but are otherwise unused, and appear unusually clean with bright white back paper.

The back markings were made with a stamp and not printed on.

The subject is out of sync with the back style as far as dates.

Dot matrix present.

Sepia-toned colors but have an oversaturated look.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcyclebackl

The one thing I for forgot to mention was that most, not all, real photo
post cards from the 1920s-30s have white borders. RPPCs from before
his playing days are usually full bleed (image to edge).

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Its not easy to fake a real photo postcard. I wonder how the catelog knew for fact they were fakes??? Let alone knew for a fact what years a certain style AZO back is found. The info on how long and what years the AZO backs were used is obviously from used postcards (postmark, and stamp removed to see style stampbox). AZO used the same design for many years. The triangle 2up-2down is know for at least a 20 year window (1910-1930). Every AZO postcard Ive seen has been stamped (not printed) on back, even nonsport subjects.

On top of that, the Ruth AZO cards are fairly scarce, I see the "3 bat" pose like the one at the top of this thread about once a year (and I have an eBay "search" just for them) I would think they would be a bit more common if they were fakes.

BTW there are now 4 different Ruth AZO cards Ive seen (just saw pictures of another example). Ive also seen a Yankee Team Picture AZO postcard (I believe the 1927 Yankees), thats was consistant with the others.

I have owned white backs, and tan back AZO cards and the quality and paper stock were the same. They are sometimes found cut at slightly different sizes though.

Here is a scan of the 3 different type of real photo Ruth cards I have at the moment.

[Archive]

Posted By: Clint

FKW, I hope you don't think I was implying that your's or Jamie's Ruth cards were fakes. I wasn't saying that, just giving some info to look for. I know that pre printed postcard backs with undeveloped fronts, in uncut sheets were sold to the photographers to put their photos on. I believe the auctioneer was saying that these fakes were rubber stamped with smearing. I'll try to scan the article.

[Archive]

Posted By: clint

Here's the photo's that go with the article.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Clinton, thanks for the info from the catalog. I knew you were just passing along info you found.

I understand the subject matter thing, but I cant see how they can say a "ca.1913-15" and then say if it has a "Post 1917" stampbox its a fake. They say the AZO (2up 2down) is "Post 1917" while other sources say "1910-1930" and "1918-30". Its common practice on postcards and even baseball cards to use photos that are 3,5,10,15+ years older than when the card was made. There is a AZO postcard with the exact same design that shows Ruth in a Boston uniform, obviously an older photo was used than the ca.late 1920s ones on the other (Ruth Yankees) postcards and Yankee Team photo.

The only 2 postcards the catalog pictured that would throw up red flags are the Mantle related ones, but those arent AZO postcards, they are "EKKP".

The "EKPP" (sic) they mention is really "EKKP", and they say its from 1920-30's, but 2 other sources say its was used for 46+ years (1904-50's).

Its all interesting, thanks for the info.

PS I also have the 7-F card but mine is blank back.


Also another info page....
http://reviews.ebay.com/Real-Photo-Postcard-Identification-amp-Dating_W0QQugidZ10000000000005830?ssPageName=BUYGD :CAT:-1:LISTINGS:1>

[Archive]

Posted By: Clint

Frank, I agree trying to pinpoint a year on a postcard is tough. Is the postcard paper old stock, was the postcard mailed 5 years after it was bought? I have multiple cards of the same image with different backs.

Thanks, for posting that link, great information! The postcards that I have a definite date for all checked out.

P. S. What does that Ruth with the baby(snookum?) go for? I always thought that was a neat postcard. Never seen one for sale either.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

The Ruth/Snookums card is a printed picture (not real photo) and more like an Exhibit card but the one I owned had a perforated edge at top.

Adam Warshaw has one in Yellow, I think it is pictured on his Exhibit site. There is also a Green one in an old auction catalog I have. I have only seen these 2 that I can remember. They are fairly rare. When I bought mine I got a great deal on it because it was on eBay in a bad category with a bad picture. I snatched it up knowing what it was right away. Havent seen another on eBay since then.

[Archive]

Posted By: jamie

do any of the big grading companies authenticate these things? im still on the fence with this pc and, if i decide to move it, want to make absolutly sure it's legit.

frank- do any of the other ruth azo pc's you've owned have a very glossy surface?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I wanted to stay out of this discussion until this auction was over because I can't say for sure one way or another whether these cards are period or not, but here is an auction that ended today with two sepia toned Ruth postcards sold by GTP.RO who I consider along with Greenmonster on ebay to be two of the most knowledgeable dealers of baseball postcards.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=012&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=220039744637&rd=1&rd=1

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

My AZO cards have all been glossy smooth surfaced real photos.


Those 2 Ruths GTP.RO are new to me, I saw them about 3 days ago. I was the under bidder.

The "Ruth and other guy" are both AZO cards (one is printed very light and almost looks blank backed), and the Mantle is a Kodak card.

The left handed batting one is normal photo but the right handed one seems to be a flipped negative but tough to tell since you cant see the logo on the hat. I compared the background seats and characteristics of the belt and belt loops and think it is a flipped negative (but a different photo, notice hands on the other guy are reversed)

Also wanted to add that the Mantle is a Kodak PC, but that type of stampbox was used for many years, 1950-Now. It could be vintage 1951-55 like the photo looks, but its the same postcard design as the 1977 Jim Rowe cards (page 328 in the 2007 SCD) except all of the Rowe cards Ive seen have had the players name written in pen or pencil on the back of the cards (always seems to be the same handwriting, Jim Rowe??). I have a couple Rowe/Kodak cards not checklisted (D.Dean, Manush), so there are many others, including a couple 1950 era Negro Leaguers.

BTW who is the guy pictured with Ruth????

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

It's not a flipped negative...it's actually two different photos. I also believe that it's two different players along with Ruth. Who they are I haven't a clue???

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

The only reason I believe its a flipped negative is in the seat section I found shadows that are flipped perfectly (above Ruths head and end of bat), the wrinkles in the fence, along with the belt loops on Ruth pants also point that way.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Ahh...I misread what you wrote earlier. Yeah, I think the photo showing Ruth in a righty "stance" is probably a flipped negative. But they are different photos -and I believe different players.