Frisch

[dgo71]

I'm by no means an expert and have no opinion one way or the other as to authenticity, but I had a couple thoughts.

Assuming it's an identification and not a signature, could it be reasonable to think the similarities are due to the time it was written? Back in the days when cursive was taught in school and people had pride in their penmanship, it seems to me that similarities in style were more a by-product of people learning a specific way to form letters.

On the other hand, if legit, could it have been signed on the back because the front has a sort of gloss that wouldn't have been easily written on? I can't really tell if the photo has a sheen to it or what instrument was used to sign, but I know players like Jimmie Foxx and Jackie Robinson most often signed the backs of their HOF plaques due to the fact that the pens of the era didn't write well on the slicker surface of the front.

Again, not weighing in on authenticity, but hopefully providing some useful considerations to assist in the sluething. Either way, it's a cool item!

[GoCubsGo32]

Originally Posted by dgo71

Assuming it's an identification and not a signature, could it be reasonable to think the similarities are due to the time it was written? Back in the days when cursive was taught in school and people had pride in their penmanship, it seems to me that similarities in style were more a by-product of people learning a specific way to form letters.

Agreed. My thoughts as well. Looks to be from 1930s just from the uniform itself.Candid snapshots are mostly signed on the front of the photo,however some do sign on the back. I'm not sure if that's the case here. I personally don't see it in the "F"s or the "R"s.

Still a neat item. Hope others can weigh in for you.

Cheers,
Gary

[mr2686]

At first look I thought there were enough similarities to warrant some investigation. The picture would have been taken somewhere between 1927 and 1938 (although it is possible it could be as late at 1939. Looking at as many exemplars as possible that were actually dated (one on a contract in 1929) and multiple ones from the 30's, I'm comfortable agreeing with those that wrote that it's more a product of the way people learned to write at that time. For the most part, Frisch's F's had more of a flourish to them, and even the simpler ones were more than these in the OP's photo. Also, the R's were, for the most part, started way below the F's, and even when it was not exaggerated, it was not real close. Anyway, that's my .02

[kdixon]

Here’s a couple. Sorry every thing I post is so small for some reason.