Autographed Hitler Portrait, stamp by Peiperhoff Verlag...is it genuine?

[johninhb]

Hi Everyone,

I would really appreciate everyone's thoughts on this item. It is supposed to by an original, personally autographed 18 x 24 cm portrait of Hitler. The images are provided by the seller in Germany, that is why the Führers face is in full bloom

My questions are please:

#1: Does the autograph look legit?

#2: The Verlag stamping on the reverse side...I would have thought all portraits of this nature would have been by Hoffmann...are other Verlag stampings also legit?

Thanks in advance for you thoughts and help
John

[johninhb]

Image #1

[johninhb]

Image #2

[johninhb]

Image #3

[johninhb]

Image #4

[Robin Lumsden]

If the signature is hand-done, I'd say it is a legit one from c. 1932-ish.

HOWEVER......it is much more likely to be a printed signature.

Are these X-ray spex he's wearing? I used to have a set of these when I was a boy. Great for seeing through clothing, as I seem to recall.

[johninhb]

Image #5

[johninhb]

Image #6

[johninhb]

Image #7

[Robin Lumsden]

Here's a specimen signature from 1937 for comparison.....

[johninhb]

Thanks Robin!

These are really tough. My thoughts were that since there looks like little "blobs" in the ink shown in the close-ups, that maybe these were indications of a fountain pen, rather than an evenly applied printed signature? For example, the bottom right side of the "H"?

[max history]

Thanks Robin!

These are really tough. My thoughts were that since there looks like little "blobs" in the ink shown in the close-ups, that maybe these were indications of a fountain pen, rather than an evenly applied printed signature? For example, the bottom right side of the "H"?

John,
Unfortunately, it is the opposite. In printed signatures viewed under magnification, you can see "blobs" as you call them. Printing ink is not applied uniformly, showing that the instrument (type face) used to apply the ink was lifted directly off the paper. With a fountain pen (which moves) the ink flow is more evenly applied, although there is nearly alway a thickness to the edging of the stroke and sometimes blank spaces where the ink flow was interrupted. Also, it is more common for handwritten signatures to end in a "flourish" as the signer withdraws the pen from the paper and crossovers will be evident throughout the writing. Crossovers are not present in printed examples. (Hope this makes sense....I've tried to explain it in simple terms.)
The images you have shown have the characteristics of a printed signature. On balance, I think Robin is right.
Max.

[johninhb]

Robin and Max,

Thank you both very much for your thoughts on this piece. I see your points and would agree. I am in possession of an authentic Hitler signature in postcard format, and the signature ink flow does differ from the one in question. I was hoping that it was only a matter of paper texture difference, but it's probably not....and I don't want to make a $400 mistake.

To spend $400 for an authentic autograph would not be bad, but a little too much for a printed one.

Thanks for saving me some bucks!
John

PS: Below is a scan of the legit one that I do have.

[andrewb]

Hi John.
I agree with Robin and Max. No doubt a printed signature. If you look on your original signtaure notice how on the crossover stroke on the 'H' the edges are darker than the inner due to the pressure applied in writing. Its found on almost all original signatures. Its a good starting point to look for when determing original signatures.
Heres a couple of original signatures from my collection to look at.
AB.

[andrewb]

Pic 2.
Regards,
AB
P.S. Does Elton know someone has his glasses?