Vintage Broadsides repro or real?

[LuckyLuke]

Completely understood...however, what happens if I came across one that filled the description of uniform tanning back and front, stench of among other things, heavy cigarette smoke...and more issues with paper in front than back. Texture of card stock is thicker than paper of today (19 pts). Finally, I know that their are classic "sized" broadsides, but are there smaller ones with the same content on it? Really appreciate all the valuable input. Thanks.

[Ladder7]

You'd be wise to heed their advice, many good counterfeits out there.

Oh, the smell thing just ain't reliable. Heck, ten minutes in one of these and you'd look and smell like a vintage broadside too.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Ladder7

You'd be wise to heed their advice, many good counterfeits out there.

Oh, the smell thing just ain't reliable. Heck, ten minutes in one of these and you'd look and smell like a vintage broadside too.

Ha! But if old paper DOESN'T smell old, that can be a clue.

[Jaybird]

How small? Measurements and a picture would certainly help. If it's on ebay and you're worried about outing it, send a PM to one of us.

[bigfish]

wrong forum

[drc]

Foxing (brownish/reddish age spots) and old time musty smell are good signs of old age. Foxing doesn't appear on all or even most antique items, but most old paper/cardboard items will smell old.

Genuine toning is generally even, not watercolor painted on. Though, if a genuine broadside was held in a frame or such, there can be darker areas where it was framed or held.

For antiques, a black light will identify many modern reprints or fakes, as modern paper often fluoresces brightly under black light.

There are a number of modern baseball fantasy broadsides-- not reprints but totally made up designs. I'm sure there are people here on Net54 who could pick them on from eBay images.

[Exhibitman]

For known signs, look for the printing quality. Reproductions made from scans or photos of old signs will look muddy as compared to the real thing, especially if the original used a halftone to reproduce an image because scanners and printers commonly available to a ripoff artist don't do a great job of reproducing them. Here is a scan of a 1921 sign meant for insertion in an Exhibit machine with a halftone image on it:



Here is a reprint I made from the scan using a photo enhancing program and a laser printer to clean it up as best as I could. The image is lesser quality than the original because of how the printer and scanner reproduced the halftone image:



A printed vintage sign should have crisp graphics and lettering. A reprint made from the original won't. The blank areas of the sign should be clean and free of printing spots--a good telltale sign of a reprinted item is printing where there should be blank background.

Research known signage. Odds are that the item you are considering is not unknown. If it is something totally unique and involves a major HOFer, you want to be extra cautious.

As far as different sizes go, it depends. Signage was designed practically, not for novelty's sake. Use common sense. Why would a manufacturer spend the money to make a sign the size of a piece of paper? Anything small enough to be a hand-bill is likely to be printed on paper or newsprint so that it could be easily carried and easily handed to pedestrians.



Anything intended for display on a countertop will likely have a built-in easel so it can stand up, or at least will have the remnants from the easel on the back.

One thing that is very tough to fake is brittleness of the board or paper. Old cardboard signage will usually feel brittle as compared to modern cardboard.

If the item is real photo, as some are, look for silvering. Very hard to fake.

[Hankphenom]

How about a picture? Your description has all the elements of a fake, but I would really have to have it hand to know for sure. Broadsides come in all different sizes, but a small version of one that looks like it was designed to be full size would make me suspicious right away.