well, the last Lautner is real.dueby_boys wrote:ZIPBAGS Exactly!! i think these were all done at like a table reading or at cast party or somethng. just because it doesnt look exactly like the ones you have doesnt mean its not real. the taylor looks likethe one from the OP. you said it was "ridiculous" but itcanadagraphs1 wrote:
The Lautner is just utterly ridiculous, so is the Reed, the Greene, so is the BDH, the Ferland, Facinelli as well.
The Pattinson & Fanning you claim look like the ones you have. I would put in the "very bad" category.
TBH, with the exception of Chaske & JR and POSSIBLY (although it looks iffy to me at best) the KStew, none of the ones I have actually gotten, signed anything close to these attempts.
I am bewildered how you can suggest any of the autographs on that poster would resemble anything they actually sign.
looks fine...BOTH DO!
look at these Peter and Taylor ones (They resemble very closely)
the facinelli is real.
The other two?? Again, I have seen & got Lautner enough times to know what little things change in his signature. he has a "bad" sig, but neither of those are "bad". They are terribly done "good" sigs.
For example on the first one, the top of the T in Taylor is consistently in a "z" shape, not a wavy line. I've never seen an "a" in Taylor.. but this 1 has one??. Then theres the scribble looking "Lautner" part of the graph. I dont even remotely know how to explain all thats wrong with that part of it.
The second one has this never before seen "a" in the Taylor part. it also has a very rigid "ylor" part to it, not at all similar to the usual more round flow of his signature. Of course, the Lautner part, like on the first one, defies description.
Simply put, the One real Lautner, and the real Facinelli should be all the proof you need that the ones on that poster arent real.