|
Author
|
Topic: 152171476562: Armstrong inscribed photo
|
Dirk
Member Posts: 933
From: Belgium
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 07-25-2016 04:00 PM
   
Can this Neil Armstrong autograph be an autopen signature? Also the dedication seems strange: |
Steve Zarelli
Member Posts: 731
From: Upstate New York, USA
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 07-25-2016 04:33 PM
Something is very wrong with this. Bad placement. Slow chugging look... No natural flow. Some sort of trace job? Avoid. |
Wehaveliftoff
Member Posts: 2343
From:
Registered: Aug 2001
|
posted 07-25-2016 05:44 PM
Looks like a trace job. |
sts205cdr
Member Posts: 649
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Jun 2001
|
posted 07-26-2016 08:52 AM
"I don't write on the flag." --NAA |
RichieB16
Member Posts: 552
From: Oregon
Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 07-27-2016 09:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sts205cdr:
"I don't write on the flag." --NAA
While it is generally agreed that Armstrong avoided writing on the flag when signing photos, there are several known examples where he did write over it...so this is not a 100% rule. That said, I agree with the others. The flow here is unnatural and it appears to be a trace job. |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-27-2016 11:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by RichieB16:
...there are several known examples where he did write over it
Just for my own edification, do you have examples? "I don't write on the flag" is an exact quote from a 2001 letter attributed to Neil. So to hear that there are no less than several examples that counteract that is a bit jarring. |
Mike Dixon
Member Posts: 1397
From: Kew, Victoria, Australia
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 07-28-2016 04:07 AM
Let's just say he avoided it... I have over 100 samples and his "Neil Atg" very rarely touched the flag and when they did, by the smallest of margins. The dedications at times did compromise that, but again, not common. |
RichieB16
Member Posts: 552
From: Oregon
Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 07-28-2016 11:28 AM
quote:
Just for my own edification, do you have examples?
I don't have any images at the moment... I did at one time but had a hard drive failure and lost them. In the past I have seen authentic examples that did have writing over the flag. I know he did avoid it, but there are known examples. I would be suspect of any item with writing on the flag without very strong provenance, but it's not a 100% guarantee of a bad signature. |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-28-2016 11:55 PM
The reason I ask isn't so much that I doubt it's the case but more that I'm curious about what constitutes "writing on the flag" as far as Neil's concerned.Are you talking about something as bad as this, where the entire letter is pretty much on the flag, or is it more cases of a stray line breaching that barrier, as he didn't calculate the amount of space properly? |
Mike Dixon
Member Posts: 1397
From: Kew, Victoria, Australia
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 07-29-2016 06:15 AM
In a word (or three) and in my opinion, "yes".I've never seen any dedicated signature that even came close to this. |
RichieB16
Member Posts: 552
From: Oregon
Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 07-29-2016 08:07 AM
I have personally never seen an authentic example that is this "aggressively" written over the flag. The examples I have seen are typically more of a "glance" on the flag by the inscription or the signature.I have heard people say in the past that "Armstrong didn't write on the flag" and use that statement as iron clad proof of a fake. My only point was that this isn't 100% true. As a generality, yes it is accurate but there are certainly exceptions to it and thus it cannot be used as the sole piece of evidence in detecting a forgery... and often people present it that way. Member sts205cdr mentioned it as his only contribution in his first post (just as an example). That was my point. I am far from an expert in Armstrong signatures but this example certainly has a myriad of problems other than the location of writing on the flag. |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-29-2016 08:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by RichieB16:
The examples I have seen are typically more of a "glance" on the flag by the inscription or the signature.
See, this could be where there's a miscommunication. Not all "writing on the flag" is equal, and we may all have different interpretations of what it entails.I've seen cases where it looks like he just miscalculated and ended up a little too far over or a little too high and ended up "breaching the barrier" (to use my phrase from earlier) to simply finish the word without making it look terrible. I consider those more accidents than anything else. What I haven't seen an authentic example of is something like this example, where the writing takes up roughly a quarter of the flag (and started a new word that could simply be moved to another line, no less). I think the intention is the heart of the flag rule. I doubt Neil signed these with a ruler, measuring and getting a precise straight edge, so if it looks the "A" simply started a bit too high or the inscription ran a bit longer or lower than expected, I'd look at it with a bit more scrutiny (he generally seemed to plot well, but mistakes happen) but I wouldn't write it off completely. If, on the other hand, it looked like this, where it appears that the flag was simply ignored, I have no problem invoking the flag rule and calling it bad (unless there are genuine authentic pieces that do the same?). |
Jonnyed
Member Posts: 396
From: Dumfries, VA, USA
Registered: Aug 2014
|
posted 07-29-2016 08:55 AM
I am not a signature expert but one of the things that really jumps out at me is the excessive space between each and every word of the dedication. Seems to be just one more "unnatural" thing about this. Did Neil write with that much spacing between his words? |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-29-2016 09:18 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Jonnyed:
Did Neil write with that much spacing between his words?
Whether he did it often or these are comparable, I can't say, but from the "Signature Exemplar" page:   |
AlanC
Member Posts: 147
From: Scotland
Registered: Nov 2014
|
posted 07-29-2016 06:46 PM
This is a pre-print photo I purchased a few years ago; is it possible that this was not the original placement of the signature and it has been added digitally to an unsigned photo? |
Mike Dixon
Member Posts: 1397
From: Kew, Victoria, Australia
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 07-29-2016 08:23 PM
Regardless of the signature placement, in my opinion, it's rubbish... |
AlanC
Member Posts: 147
From: Scotland
Registered: Nov 2014
|
posted 07-30-2016 08:32 AM
Well, that's £5.99 I won't see again...With regard to my original question; can a signature be digitally inserted onto a photo, or did the signer not do his research and simply scrawl his "rubbish" attempt over Old Glory? |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-30-2016 09:14 AM
Either is possible. Photoshopping a signature like that wouldn't be too difficult.The question of whose signature it is, on the other hand, is a question I personally can't answer. |
AlanC
Member Posts: 147
From: Scotland
Registered: Nov 2014
|
posted 07-30-2016 09:19 AM
Thanks Mike. |
Mike_The_First
Member Posts: 436
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2014
|
posted 07-30-2016 09:33 AM
No problem. If they did Photoshop it, they did a terrible job, as the signature is far too big for the photo.If it is actually Neil's signature and they Photoshopped it with the hope that it would look legitimate, they made a host of other mistakes. For starters, I've never seen a WSS shot signed at that angle. Usually they seem to go "up" not "down." And, of course, there's the flag thing. |
advertisement