Can BAS tell a real Stan Lee autograph?9621

Originally Posted by gmellos
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombie_Head
Quote:

Originally Posted by JLA555
Hes issue is the older it got, hes sig got shaky making it harder to verify.

it was from around 2010-2012 some where in there. Cgc had him signing at a wizard world convention.

submit to cbcs for verification

Originally Posted by Bronte
While I would be upset at a known to me signature was denied, I also recognize signature verification is not an exact science. I would imagine it is kinda like grading a book. There isnt an exact template. It's a best guess / effort scenario.

May I ask what they charged you for the attempt?

Originally Posted by Bronte
While I would be upset at a known to me signature was denied, I also recognize signature verification is not an exact science. I would imagine it is kinda like grading a book. There isnt an exact template. It's a best guess / effort scenario.

Originally Posted by Bronte
Apparently, I am SEVERELY mistaken as to how I assumed it was done.

@Jesse_O
Thank you for informing me on the process.

Originally Posted by etapi65
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombie_Head
I got Stan Lee to sign this book at a convention in New Orleans in person and they can’t tell it’s real? Makes me wonder about that company. If you have a Stan Lee auto probably wouldn’t send it in to get verified just saying.
A blind Stan Lee can tell this is real.

Lol

Pretty certain the "L" got you denied. If you look at his typical sig the "L" is looped. The downstroke on the "a" doesn't cut through the rest of the "a" quite the same either. All they can do is compare it to the samples they have and let the machine do it's work; if it varies enough it won't pass. Unless you can show examples of them verifying faked sigs. I understand why you're angry, but your experience doesn't invalidate the process. There's always a risk of having sigs denied from verification whether you know them to be legit or not. I have every confidence they can spot a fake. They may also, occasionally peg one as not possible to be verified that's legitimate. It's not a bunch of dudes in a room with cigars throwing at dart boards. This is a well-established, well-respected process. Yours isn't the first to be unverified but likely authentic and it won't be the last.

Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
Actually it gives them extraordinary credit if you understand the process of verifying signatures. For instance one of the methods used to verify signatures is predictive analysis...or for simpler terms it looks for where a signature should fall within known examples.....it then views the signature looking to see if the way each line loop and curve falls within the expected parameters...if it does not it fails.


By virture of understanding what they do write your name ten times. Let me know the minute you get any two that are perfectly identical...you wont...never. The pressure points, loops and flow of the letters will always be slightly different. Verifying signatures requires the signature being verified to fall within expected parameters given other samplings.



Now suppose you sign your name one day and are sick, or did not hardly sleep the night before..trust me, it will be noticeable within your signature to some degree...or were using a medication, or drunk, or hurried, or angry ...it might make that signature fall outside the expected parameters.


It does not mean the angry signature nor the drunk one are fakes, it simply means they deviate enough from established examples to give cause to question the signature...which means they are doing their job, questioning and verifying it as they should...


If they were just rolling a dice, or flipping a coin you might get results that match your expectations better, but as long as there is a method and science involved, there will be deviation.


If you think all things are that precise, remember it when the next coke machine kicks out your quarter because its a newer state quarter that is just enough different than other quarters to be considered bogus.