SS photo - good one ?

[laxymil]

hello , please opinion about this photo .

[Michael73]

Original

[BlackWatch1]

Looks good from here but to be sure you could check it for brighteners by using a UV light and examine the photo for small pixel dots that would indicate it was printed and not a real photo. And of course the source you got it from is a big factor in it's authenticity.

[laxymil]

thanks a lot for help

[Michael73]

Looks good from here but to be sure you could check it for brighteners by using a UV light and examine the photo for small pixel dots that would indicate it was printed and not a real photo. And of course the source you got it from is a big factor in it's authenticity.

Hi
With all do respect both your points are not completely correct

1.There are many fakes which do not glow on UV test
2.Not sure which "good" source do you mean, but some big dealers have fakes offered for sale as we speak

One must do his homework before buying

This photo is 1000% original though

All the best
Michael

[BlackWatch1]

This photo is 1000% original though

True that the faker's have used chemicals to mask the brightner's and there have been stories of fakers buying war period paper in bulk and making new copies from boatloads of negative's. Yes, Buyer Beware, but I wouldn't guarantee a photo a "1000%" unless I knew where it came from or perhaps have handled it myself(and in this case I would only say 90% certainty lol). This photo LOOKS GOOD, BUT it is a photo of a photo lol. If I was to see this up for sale and only had this image of the original to judge by I might stay away from it unless it was cheap. My reason? Because the reverse is very grubby and the image side has only minor blemishes that do not take away from the portrait. Thus, I would think to myself, "Is this a fake and they've dirtied it up to look more "authentic"?

[1933 FORD NUT]

Sure looks like quarterback Joe Montana in his early years !!!!!

[Andrew Harris]

True that the faker's have used chemicals to mask the brightner's and there have been stories of fakers buying war period paper in bulk and making new copies from boatloads of negative's. Yes, Buyer Beware, but I wouldn't guarantee a photo a "1000%" unless I knew where it came from or perhaps have handled it myself(and in this case I would only say 90% certainty lol). This photo LOOKS GOOD, BUT it is a photo of a photo lol. If I was to see this up for sale and only had this image of the original to judge by I might stay away from it unless it was cheap. My reason? Because the reverse is very grubby and the image side has only minor blemishes that do not take away from the portrait. Thus, I would think to myself, "Is this a fake and they've dirtied it up to look more "authentic"?

As said before by Michael, this portrait is 1000% original without any "maybe", "in hand examination", etc.

Rostyslav.

[Andrew Harris]

P.S. By the way, do you see slight silver mirroring on this photo?

Rostyslav.

[BlackWatch1]

P.S. By the way, do you see slight silver mirroring on this photo?

Rostyslav.

Yes, I see the mirroring. They can't reproduce the same effect? I know this can be a trait of period photo's going back to the early 20th century. Nice point Andrew