AH & Goering Signatures For Review

[Il_brillante]

Hello friends,

Could I have please your opinions about an Award I found with AH and Goering signatures dated 3 November 1939.

Are they printed or original hand-signed?

Thank you very much for your time, bye friends!

[Il_brillante]

..

[max history]

The Hitler is printed and the Göring is handwritten.
Max.

[Il_brillante]

Thank you Max, you confirmed my thinkings

bye my friend!

[kahle33]

The Hitler is printed and the Göring is handwritten.
Max.

You sure on the Goring? Looks like one of his autopens. Those things are so tricky. They can have quite a few differences between them and still be autopens.

Obviously you've been at this WAYYY longer than me, but I've done quite a bit of study on Goring, and I think there are very few real signatures of his out there.. The guy had at least 3 autopens.

[kahle33]

See here we go, looks like autopen. Way too similar.

[max history]

See here we go, looks like autopen. Way too similar

It's not autopen/printed. It's definitely handwritten. This is plainly obvious in post #2.
Max.

[kahle33]

We just disagree. The differences you see are just a result of the autopen doing different things IMO. There are wayyyyy too many things that are exactly the same that I believe point to an autopen. The way the letters are formed are just way too exact. Especially given that when Goring signed an authentic signature is was usually very different.

Here is an example of a real Full Goring signature. The feel is just a lot different. Image courtesy of Alexander auctions.

[Jeremy]

For reference...

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ghlight=goring

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ghlight=goring

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ghlight=goring

[Jeremy]

comparison

1939 at bottom is the year of comparison between sigs... significant similarities and minor differences...

[Jeremy]

comparison

A further comparison for two 1939 sigs... a bit amateur, maybe, but as I said in one of the other threads, I find it difficult to believe that Goering managed to sign with such symmetry... my own opinion is autopen

[max history]

It's all too easy to cry "autopen!" with Göring signatures nowadays as a result of similarities. The major thing to remember with autopen signatures (which were not as widely used as often stated during the 1930s - and certainly not as common and cheap as printed signatures which were widely used) is that autopen signatures ALWAYS distribute ink evenly as there is no varied pressure applied as in handwriting. The example shown in post #2 obviously has uneven application as a result of varied pressure. A machine does not do that.
Without the benefit of physical examination, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Max.

[Jeremy]

But isn't the ink distribution for both examples in my previous post very similar? Look at the ink features for the final 'g' regarding the top circular part. It's close to identical. Can't be possible if hand signed, can it? Not merely crying 'autopen' but illustrate what makes me think it is autopen.

[max history]

All reliable creditable sources agree that a machine does not vary in pressure application of ink. It's also common sense. Even the largely unreliable Wikipedia states "The Autopen signature is made with even pressure (and indentation in the paper), which is how these machines are distinguishable from original handwriting where the pressure varies."
All creditable autograph and handwriting experts state that a signature can be reproduced time and time again with remarkable similarities, but never identical. These are similar, but not identical.
As I said, we will have to agree to disagree. I have nothing further to add.
Max.

[glock26]

I agree with Max on this one.

Hand signed in my opinion.

I will refer you to my previous posts about this:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ghlight=goring


cheers, del.