What are some good resources to learn about detecting fakes/reprints?

[drcy]

I said it's a sign not proof, but will let the issue drop too. We've both made our points. If people wish to mentally cross off my sniff test, that's fine by me.

[david_l]

@ drcy

I always enjoy the opportunity to talk about preservation issues. Thanks for the conversation. Best of luck with all your collecting endeavors in the future!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by drcy

I said it's a sign not proof, but will let the issue drop too. We've both made our points. If people wish to mentally cross off my sniff test, that's fine by me.

For the record, I was one of the first adopters (*I am aware of) of the smell test. I still use it and everything else. A lot of times it's the whole picture that doesn't add up, not just one or two things. Knowledge is king. Thanks to you and the other David for the discussion. It probably helped some folks.

[steve B]

Back when I could still smell reliably, there were some smells that were good and some not so good as far as originality goes.

The smell of printing ink - Not good unless the item is rather new.
Mold- Not so good, as has already been covered.

There's a hard to describe "old paper" smell that's usually a good sign. I have a hard time smelling it now, unless I'm in a roomful of old paper. (And since it's a smell of a decomposition product, it's a mixed bag -not bad for original, not all that good for preservation.

Smells that shouldn't be there - Wax, Solvents, etc. usually point to problems. (For paper, I almost bought a bat that was cool, but had been cleaned with lemon pledge. Wasn't a factor in the decision, but it was a bit strange )


We really should have a thread on preservation/conservation. I've read a lot about the formal methods, and constantly have to balance those with the reality of being an average person living in a house from the 1880's.

Steve B