As many people have before..... and if Im doing wrong here I am sorry .. But I have found this item showing all the bands signatures on the night at the opera.....
... Unfortunately I am no exert with signatures and as I know there are may experts amongst us can someone please verify if these are the real deal or another copy that we all see so often..
.... I thank you in advance for your help...
thefallenqueen · Member since
fake - no doubt, sorry....
. · Member since
Nobody can verify signatures
Mr. Scully · Member since
100% fake, absolutely no doubt about it. Not even remotely similar to genuine Queen signatures.
thefallenqueen · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Kurgan wrote:[/b]
Nobody can verify signatures[/QUOTE]
... but anybody can leave stupid comments!
. · Member since
I agree, so why do you do it?
. · Member since
There are good and bad signatures. There are good and bad guesses at verifying their authenticity. At the end of the day a guess is just that and there will always be an element of doubt either way. A self proclaimed 'expert' can be wrong, I've proven that before now.
thefallenqueen · Member since
There are good and bad signatures - this one's a bad one, you don't have to be an expert, even a Kurgan bastard should be able to see that!
. · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thefallenqueen wrote:[/b]
There are good and bad signatures - this one's a bad one, you don't have to be an expert, even a Kurgan bastard should be able to see that![/QUOTE]
I think you are missing the point, a bad signature doesn't always mean it's 'fake'.
I'm simply saying there is ALWAYS doubt when it comes to guessing whether an autograph is genuine, and you are making a guess.
Have you ever been wrong in your guesswork regarding authenticity?
thefallenqueen · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Kurgan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thefallenqueen wrote:[/b]
There are good and bad signatures - this one's a bad one, you don't have to be an expert, even a Kurgan bastard should be able to see that![/QUOTE]
I think you are missing the point, a bad signature doesn't always mean it's 'fake'.
I'm simply saying there is ALWAYS doubt when it comes to guessing whether an autograph is genuine, and you are making a guess.
Have you ever been wrong in your guesswork regarding authenticity?
[/QUOTE]
a bad signature doesn't always mean it's fake... but an obvious BAD FAKE doesn't have to be discussed! There might be good fakes and ugly genuine autographs - we've had this discussion before, the forum is full of this - this is not even a good fake so it's all said
. · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thefallenqueen wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Kurgan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thefallenqueen wrote:[/b]
There are good and bad signatures - this one's a bad one, you don't have to be an expert, even a Kurgan bastard should be able to see that![/QUOTE]
I think you are missing the point, a bad signature doesn't always mean it's 'fake'.
I'm simply saying there is ALWAYS doubt when it comes to guessing whether an autograph is genuine, and you are making a guess.
Have you ever been wrong in your guesswork regarding authenticity?
[/QUOTE]
a bad signature doesn't always mean it's fake... but an obvious BAD FAKE doesn't have to be discussed! There might be good fakes and ugly genuine autographs - we've had this discussion before, the forum is full of this - this is not even a good fake so it's all said
[/QUOTE]
But you didn't answer my question.
Thistle · Member since
I've been wrong at times when trying to decide the genuine from the fake, as you have demonstrated before kurgan. But this doesn't take a lot of "guessing" - the picture is clear enough to determine that the same hand pressure has been applied to all of the signatures. Also, having see many, many examples of Brian's autograph, as well as having personally obtained a few, this is nowhere near the way he'd autograph anything. You can argue the toss all you like, and your point is valid. But so is ours, and this just does not look genuine.
