Fake or real?

[ASF123]

Hi all - today I received these 3 cards from an eBay seller.

I'm 99% sure the '68 is a fake - the focus isn't sharp, and under magnification the print pattern is blurred and barely visible rather than sharp. Red flag #2 is the back, which has faint print dots where a blank cardboard background should be, behind the name/info at the top and the cartoon at the bottom. And then when I went to take a photo with my iPad for this post, the telltale cracking effect became visible. It doesn't really show up in the version below because of file size limits, but it's definitely there.

I'm therefore suspicious of the '64 and the '65, of course, but I can't seem to find any obvious signs, even under magnification. The print patterns look like others in my collection, and the backs are blank where they should be. No cracking effect in the iPad photos, and the dot pattern on the surface looks similar to others. Are there other signs I'm missing, or maybe there are fakes that are better done than the '68?

The Mays does have some offset in the printing that is visible in the white outside the lines of the W and M in his name on the back, and under magnification, each letter in his name/position has a pink outline under it and a blue one above it.

Any input is appreciated, as always.

[jingram058]

The 68 Mantle is unquestionably fake; aside from your comments, the front "circle" text is blurred, and the red "Mantle" has bled, both should be crisp even if his photo is kind of blurry or slightly out of focus, which is pretty common.

The 65 Mays and 64 Mantle, I can't tell from afar. If fake, and I assume they are, they are well done. Eveything looks pretty much right from the photos. The key is the backs and what they feel like. Should feel like old cardboard with printing on it. Not smooth, and no gloss.

[Hxcmilkshake]

The Mays doesn't have much border, be sure to measure it.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

Straightened the pics out...

IMG_0001 (1).jpgIMG_0002 (1).jpg

[swarmee]

Card is super narrow, so if it measures 2.5" wide, you know it's a counterfeit that was printed with the wrong resolution.

[G1911]

68 is definitely fake, but if the other 2 are I can't tell from the photos and are well done

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Card is super narrow, so if it measures 2.5" wide, you know it's a counterfeit that was printed with the wrong resolution.

Which card do you mean? The '68 Mantle is indeed just a tiny bit narrow, but the other two are dead on with other cards from my collection. I don't see any distortions in the images on those that would result from "resizing."

The backs of the Mays and the '64 Mantle feel fine to me - no glossiness or unnatural smoothness as far as I can tell, but I don't have any experience in these things. The '68 Mantle maybe does feel a little oddly smooth by comparison, but that could very well be just the power of suggestion.

[swarmee]

If the card measures short, then what I'm saying won't work. But if it measured as full, you would know it's counterfeit because there isn't enough border for a 2.5" wide card.

[Hxcmilkshake]

Or, buy graded? (Stick to PSA, BVG/BGS or SGC) A presentable low grade 68 Mantle is about $100. Worth the piece of mind and easier to sell later.

The fakes are getting better so if you are light on experience I would go this route.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk