VSP and Dynamic Forces signed comics6398

Originally Posted by poka
Quote:

Originally Posted by eee91
The thought had crossed my mind, but since 2 of 3 isn't a big sample size, I wanted to ask and see what everyone else's experience has been.

At the end of the day, I doubt complaining will help - CBCS will stand by its experts and DF will stand by its reputation/certificates...

I would still let them know and make it right. Cannot be in their interest that their sigs are being questioned as being legit.

Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:

Originally Posted by poka
Quote:

Originally Posted by eee91
The thought had crossed my mind, but since 2 of 3 isn't a big sample size, I wanted to ask and see what everyone else's experience has been.

At the end of the day, I doubt complaining will help - CBCS will stand by its experts and DF will stand by its reputation/certificates...

I would still let them know and make it right. Cannot be in their interest that their sigs are being questioned as being legit.

These are ten year old+ signatures. VSP is only an opinion. DF has been in business for a very long time in the comics industry. I wouldn't waste your time, eee91, and just know that DF didn't get to where they are by faking signatures, there's little value in forging such things, and that un-witnessed signatures doesn't mean inauthentic signatures.
...and stick with witnessed signatures going forward.

Originally Posted by poka
Quote:

Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:

Originally Posted by poka
Quote:

Originally Posted by eee91
The thought had crossed my mind, but since 2 of 3 isn't a big sample size, I wanted to ask and see what everyone else's experience has been.

At the end of the day, I doubt complaining will help - CBCS will stand by its experts and DF will stand by its reputation/certificates...

I would still let them know and make it right. Cannot be in their interest that their sigs are being questioned as being legit.

These are ten year old+ signatures. VSP is only an opinion. DF has been in business for a very long time in the comics industry. I wouldn't waste your time, eee91, and just know that DF didn't get to where they are by faking signatures, there's little value in forging such things, and that un-witnessed signatures doesn't mean inauthentic signatures.
...and stick with witnessed signatures going forward.

If OP bought them directly from DF - then I see no harm informing them.

On the other hand - if OP purchased them 2nd hand - then agreed

Originally Posted by DocBrown
By the way...people's signatures change over time.

Originally Posted by eee91
Yeah, I'm not going to complain - I bought them second hand. And even having failed verification, they still have the DF COAs so they still have value if I ever resell them. I was just genuinely curious if my experience was unique.

Thanks everybody for chiming in!

Originally Posted by Nuffsaid111
I've sent in about 10 vsp books that I personally obtained the sig. All passed as they should have

Originally Posted by Nuffsaid111
@Eikkichi
Conan 1 9.0: Barry smith and Roy Thomas
Hulk 181 9.6: herb trimpe
Spiderman 300 9.6 : McFarlane
Kamandi 1 7.5: Kirby
Defenders 1 8.5: Englehart
DC presents 47 9.4: Kupperberg
Star wars 1 9.2: chaykin
GOTG Prelude 1 9.6: Karen Gillan
Dark knight 1 9.4: miller and Jansen

Sending in silver surfer 4 signed by John buscema, Stan Lee, Sal Buscemi
Sending in SHIELD 1 signed by steranko and Sinnott

Originally Posted by SteveRicketts
Quote:

Originally Posted by 3JJr
Quote:

Originally Posted by poka
Quote:

Originally Posted by eee91
The thought had crossed my mind, but since 2 of 3 isn't a big sample size, I wanted to ask and see what everyone else's experience has been.

At the end of the day, I doubt complaining will help - CBCS will stand by its experts and DF will stand by its reputation/certificates...

I would still let them know and make it right. Cannot be in their interest that their sigs are being questioned as being legit.

I've studied the site of the authenticators behind VSP. They're very specific about the authentication system they've devised so for an "autograph hound" and keen student of handwriting analysis, it's easy to understand their metrics.

In short, this coordinate of key points they use for each signature is like identifying our solar system by a set position of the planets. But as we all know, the planets move. They change position. To each other, and to the sun. And the sun itself moves through space. So if you were an observer of the solar system in 2010 and construed an identifying pattern at that that time, the same solar system by 2016 may be unidentifiable using that same template!

From what I gather studying their site, their signature identification is base on the premise that everybody signs the same way every time, at the same speed, the same pressure, with the same pen, in the same writing position, on the same surface, and in the same frame of mind. Like a machine. The same, each and every time. One set pattern. One template. Set distances, angles, trajectories, heights, lengths; this letter should be positioned at this precise point and this next one at 3 to 5 degrees tilt to the left, etc., etc., this is the nature of their graph that a signature must precisely fit or it is turned down.

Now, with this type of system, you will eventually pass a signature that fits your precise formula, but if there's any slight differences due to elan or writing position, or even mood, many will fail that might have been authentic if looked upon with a different manner of assessment.

While every individual's writing mechanics remain fairly consistent, for the most part, the starting point, the proportions, the lift points, etc., etc., tendencies that repeat over and over again, the architecture of the signatures can change drastically, even on consecutively done autographs! Like the planets in motion in the example cited.

Their system seems to be based on one set pattern for every signor and if that narrow tolerance pattern is not present, the autograph is turned down.

That's a very detailed analysis. You must have a background in autograph analysis, or at least a vested interest in it.