Ruth real or Fake??

[tuckr1]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tchlink:top:en

Real or fake??

[36GoudeyMan]

The seller has high quality and quantity of feedback, so that's a plus, but their description makes clear that, as usual, they aren't card graders or dealers, so they don't really know what this un-authenticated card might really be. They've got another half-dozen cards from this same "estate" up for sale, in varying lower condition, with some nice but not super-key or rare cards.

The card itself, I'm not expert enough to know for sure, but a lot of the typical earmarks of a reprint SK Ruth are not there, especially in the yellow background/white border blending. I'm sure someone knows better, but a lot of the more standard red flags are not present here.

[poorlydrawncat]

I'm gonna be honest, I saw all of this guy's auctions and frankly they all look fake to me. The 1933 Goudey Ruth looks pretty good, but the others just seem off and from what I can tell from the scans, they all have that grainy, muted, off-color feel that most reprints have. I wish the scans were higher resolution so you could get a better feel for how the pixels look, but from what I can tell the pixilation is completely uniform (bad sign). Look at the Sport Kings Ruth you linked to. When you zoom there is a grainy look that bleeds seemlessly into all elements of the card. Generally the background, the face, the logo, etc. should all look different even if you cant completely make out the individual pixels.


I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion.

[smtjoy]

The 1933 Goudey 144 Ruth is fake I would stay away from the rest

[Clutch-Hitter]

IMO, they used a photo shop type program to increase the sharpness (too much) of the photo, which also caused the cards to look somewhat fake. And because the seller held the card, and without using a flash, the chances of a clear picture was small, which in turn likely led to them greatly increasing the sharpness (note the white areas in the fingers from trying to firmly hold it still). The contrast also appears bumped up quite a bit on at least a few.

If I submitted the card to PSA, it would get a 1 (mk).

BTW, this should be on the main forum, not in the B/S/T

[frankh8147]

I can tell you 100%, without a doubt that the sports king Ruth is a fake. It's kind of scary because it's a good counterfeit but aging doesn't change the background color of this card (it should be a little greener than this, rather than the yellow you see). Also, the clarity is close but it's a little off. I will however let the seller know because this could be an honest mistake- i mean, that's a good counterfeit-to meat least.

[frankh8147]

One more thing that applies specifically to the 1933 Sports kings Ruth, on the left middle of the card (stretching from Ruth's chin to his nose), is a faded area where white shows on the card. On Ruth's real card, the background is solid. I have never a counterfeit without this faded area and I have never seen a real Ruth with this faded area. If anyone has a real Sports Kings' Ruth with this faded area OR a counterfeit without this faded area, please let me know so I can correct my thinking but this has been pretty consistent for me.