by Mr Kennedy » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:12 pm
zanne wrote:Mr Kennedy wrote:Doesnt look stamped at all. It looks more like its been signed on an overly glossy pic and thats caused the ink to blotch like it has.
Erm, a stamp would create a similar effect - it's honestly not completely strange to think it's stamped! :neutral:
Mr Kennedy wrote:Compare to other examples and they're blatantly different, so its 100% handsigned, and likely authentic.
Congrats!
There is only one other recent example, so you can't say they're "blantantly different" - even the OP says it's very similar!
A stamp would creat a "similar" effect yes, but would be much more evident, especially on a photo as glossy as this one clearly is. You can see stroke marks as well, which a stamp would not do.
Its not strange to think its stamped, and I can see how people would think that. The thought process would be "its blotched, its stamped". Its an assumption rather than an informed opinion.
Similar to other examples with a quick glance, yes, but then all of Phelps' tuff is similar as his autograph for the most part is extremely consistent.
You only need one other example to back the point up in this case, and one other example there is. The other example wasnt the main point of my post though, I tacked that on the end after looking at the other thread.
My main point is that the original pic, even with no other examples, could easily be argued against it being a stamp.
[quote="zanne"][quote="Mr Kennedy"]Doesnt look stamped at all. It looks more like its been signed on an overly glossy pic and thats caused the ink to blotch like it has.
[/quote]
Erm, a stamp would create a similar effect - it's honestly not completely strange to think it's stamped! :neutral:
[quote="Mr Kennedy"]Compare to other examples and they're blatantly different, so its 100% handsigned, and likely authentic.
Congrats![/quote]
There is only one other recent example, so you can't say they're "blantantly different" - even the OP says it's very similar![/quote]
A stamp would creat a "similar" effect yes, but would be much more evident, especially on a photo as glossy as this one clearly is. You can see stroke marks as well, which a stamp would not do.
Its not strange to think its stamped, and I can see how people would think that. The thought process would be "its blotched, its stamped". Its an assumption rather than an informed opinion.
Similar to other examples with a quick glance, yes, but then all of Phelps' tuff is similar as his autograph for the most part is extremely consistent.
You only need one other example to back the point up in this case, and one other example there is. The other example wasnt the main point of my post though, I tacked that on the end after looking at the other thread.
My main point is that the original pic, even with no other examples, could easily be argued against it being a stamp.