Are AP's really a success?

by **ne0ven0m** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:55 am

To me, the only successes are in person, or the 99% certain that it's authentic TTM. {thumb2}

by **Moridin** » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:10 am

Chris102 wrote:
Mr Kennedy wrote:They're not authentic, so therefore they're not autographs, so I want nothing to do with them.
They are authentic and they are autographs, they're just not original {thumb2}
Preprints are authentic autographs, too. They're not original, but they are authentic.

Just as much as a simulated leather jacket is a real cowhide leather jacket

by **Mr Kennedy** » Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:11 pm

lebronjames69 wrote:yes they are
http://www.youtube.com/user/friendlyniga

9 posts and the last 7 are all basically just trying to get hits for his youtube account.

Do we have any Mods who want to clean those posts up?

by **Mr Kennedy** » Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:21 pm

Chris102 wrote:
Mr Kennedy wrote:They're not authentic, so therefore they're not autographs, so I want nothing to do with them.
They are authentic and they are autographs, they're just not original {thumb2}
Preprints are authentic autographs, too. They're not original, but they are authentic.

The dictionary defines an autograph as -

1. a person's own signature: He collects autographs of artists.
2. something written in a person's own hand, as a manuscript or letter.
3. written by a person's own hand: an autograph letter.
4. containing autographs: an autograph album.
5. to write one's name on or in; sign: to autograph a book.
6. to write with one's own hand.

Therefore anything other than an "authentic, handsigned autograph" is NOT an autograph.

APs/PPs/secs/stamps are not autographs, they are facsimilies/replicas. There is a big difference.

Saying "preprints are authentic autographs" (in my opinion) is ridiculous, and just plain wrong, and I'm surprised at hearing you say that CDolan :neutral: (no offence intended)

by **Moridin** » Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:48 am

Chris102 wrote:An autopen is an authentic autograph. Not an original autograph, but still an authentic one.

Most people think the word 'authentic' means that it's an original signature, a 'real' signature. 'Authentic' means that it was signed by the particular person you're writing to. So an autopen signature from President Bush is an authentic signature because he signed it himself at one point, but it's not original because a machine is duplicating it.

An autopen signature shouldn't be considered 'fake' because a 'fake autograph' is a forged autograph, and an autopen signature is in no way a forged autograph.

It's a facsimile of the original autograph, therefore not original, therefore not authentic. An authentic replica, if anything.

by **Chris102** » Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:48 am

Mr Kennedy wrote:They're not authentic, so therefore they're not autographs, so I want nothing to do with them.

They are authentic and they are autographs, they're just not original {thumb2}
Preprints are authentic autographs, too. They're not original, but they are authentic.

by **Mr Kennedy** » Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:15 pm

Droidboy wrote:I'm pretty new here, but I've been collecting autographs for about 30 years now. Only recently I've gotten rather agressive about it, and only after I discovered this board, did I ever send off for an autograph. Up until a few weeks ago, every autograph I've ever gotten was an in person, minus my Gene Roddenberry signed and canceled check.

Anyhow....the reason I'm posting is that I see a lot of people posting successes about preprints and autopen'd signatures. My question is, while it a success to get something back, neither are really autographs. They're replicas of autographs. So is it just a success that you got something?

Best,

Gregg

I treat it as a successful response, so at least I can make a record that I've had a reply.

But make no mistake, in my opinion autopens, stamps, preprints and secretarials are nothing but failures as far as an autograph goes. I dont see why anyone would want them. They're not authentic, so therefore they're not autographs, so I want nothing to do with them.

by **annie985** » Sat Aug 23, 2008 5:32 am

I'm happy with AP's. It's nice to know that my letter got to it's destination and that I did get something back in return even if it's not authentic. It's just kind of neat to show friends/family that these are all the people I've written and this is what I got back.

by **Droidboy** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:16 pm

I am definitely in the camp that anything other than a real honest to goodness, pen in hand autograph, as being fake. To me a AP is a glorified PP, but I respect the other views.

Gregg

by **Reav** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:12 am

I don't consider APs/PPs or secretarials a success in any way. The only thing it tells me is "I'm not to be bothered to sign your damn photo".

Are AP's really a success?

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?

Re: Are AP's really a success?


Fanmail.biz	Message Board