|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: julie
Only the forum member shall remain annymous--and everyone knows who he is. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: Tom Lawrie
My experience with Kevin, Doug Allen and the others at Mastronet has always been positive. Their bredth of knowledge is pretty incredible, but there are always going to be a few items about which Kevin, Doug or the others may have only minimal knowledge. But from your story I gleemed two points that reassure me: |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: runscott
I was just discussing this with a friend - one of things I find really odd about this hobby is that there are so many areas where there IS NOT an expert, but there could be if someone had the interest and inclination to put time into the subject area (but a lot of work might be required). I won't even mention subjects since it might offend some, and that is not my intention. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that this is a hobby and in most cases we don't get paid for our level of expertise; therefore, we become as "expert" in an area as we feel like, then stop. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: julie
... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: Hankron
I would like to point out that a number of the topics that I regularly harp on ('if it's real it's a photoengraving,' 'look for paper fibers,' 'old photos will likely have silvering' etc) are not just technicalities but have to do with the authenticity of an item. Julie's specific question about the expensive photograph she was bidding on was, whether it was really an original from the 1882 or was it a reprint, circa 1905. Most photographs aren't like baseball cards, where you can refer to a SCD or Beckett to see if when they were made. So the mostly technical facts that Kevin and I discussed related to how to judge whether the photo was actually from the 19th century. In this case, he took out a microscope and looked for paper fibers in the photographic image. What does viewable paper fibers say? In combination with the other qualities of the photo, this almost assures that Julie's photograph was original. This is because that on most 20th century baseball photographs, made with a different process that covers the image in gelatin, the paper fibers can't be seen under a microscope. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Disillusioned with Mastro--even if still grateful.
Posted By: RC_McKenzie
I was offering 22 e105's on ebay for $3000. He sent me a solicitation email after the auction ended with no bids. 4 months later I got a check from Mastro for around $1800. That's my Hemingwayesque short story version. They don't even send me a catalogue. I'm sure they are good people, but I like ebay to buy and sell. I like public auctions. JMHO. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
From a grateful board member. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 03-12-2008 08:39 AM |
June Mastro Classic Collector Auction - NOT a Mastro bashing thread! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 10 | 07-19-2007 09:17 PM |
Mastro is up ! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 04-01-2006 11:07 PM |
Mastro | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 19 | 08-25-2002 08:46 PM |
Mastro does it again | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 08-06-2002 04:02 PM |