Babe Ruth General Gum Sign/Display - Black Light PIX added FINALLY

[chadeast]

Just a reminder that non-fluorescence will not be conclusive either way. Lots of modern paper & inks do not fluoresce, and it is trivial to select ones that don't fluoresce, or use old stock, if you care to do so. Optical brighteners tend to give paper a bluish tint, which can disrupt the intended hues of a particular image, so there is plenty of paper available without brighteners for those who desire it, such as artists. If it does fluoresce though, that is definitive proof that the materials are not of the proposed period.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by chadeast

Just a reminder that non-fluorescence will not be conclusive either way. Lots of modern paper & inks do not fluoresce, and it is trivial to select ones that don't fluoresce, or use old stock, if you care to do so. Optical brighteners tend to give paper a bluish tint, which can disrupt the intended hues of a particular image, so there is plenty of paper available without brighteners for those who desire it, such as artists. If it does fluoresce though, that is definitive proof that the materials are not of the proposed period.

Yes. No optical brighteners is supporting evidence not proof an item is old. Though probably 90+ percent of modern reprints and counterfeits will fluoresce brightly with UV.

While one test or quality can identify a card as fake or a reprint, authentication involves considering a variety of tests, qualities and information.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by drcy

...While one test or quality can identify a card as fake or a reprint, authentication involves considering a variety of tests, qualities and information.

This pearl of wisdom is applicable across the entire hobby. It applies to numerous other fields, as well.