• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

divad

Member
  • Posts

    41,149
  • Joined

Posts posted by divad

  1.  

    While I can't say definitively it is not authentic, I think the chances are high that it is a forgery. If it was mine, I would operate under the presumption the signature is not authentic.

     

     

     

    That is pretty much the assumption I have been making. In part, I posted this book

    to get some reactions to the signature. Like I said, it is the only signed book I own

    and I'm no expert.

    But, it did come from Sothebys and they did call it out as a Kirby signature in the catalog....

    Maybe a lawsuit.... 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

     

    Just kidding!

     

    Anyway, thanks for all the input everybody!

     

    Yet another Sotheby's "certification" 893scratchchin-thumb.gifwink.gifgrin.gif

  2. 4.5 sounds about right . . . but, are you sure that's Jack's sig? Looks a little too neat to me -- can anyone chime in here? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

     

    I think I've got a book he signed somewhere. I'll take a look and see if I can dig it up. That does look sweet, tho.

     

    Thanks - I did a Google search for examples of Jack's signature, and there are a couple of interesting things to note:

     

    1) In every instance Jack uses lower case letters, not block print capitals. First hand, I know this isn't conclusive, as I myself switch between them when writing (hey, I'm left-handed - give me a break!) But when I sign my name, I almost exclusively use -script.

     

    2) The end of Jack's "J" doesn't come up and around, but consistently points downward.

     

    That being said, there appear to be a an equal number of similarities, although those are significant variations. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

     

    This may be why CGC doesn't make a forensic judgment, and gives such books a qualified label, right?

  3. Can someone please host the pics on a private ftp server or e-mail them to me (brrempel@gmail.com) so I can view them from work?

     

    fussy, fussy 27_laughing.gif

     

    I'm not complaining, but would like to see the pics. You going to step up and e-mail them? confused-smiley-013.gif

     

    Hey! I'm workin' here! makepoint.gif

  4. I have three amazing photos. They're each a couple of MBs, so I can't post them up.

     

    One photo has the 91 rarest DCs on it.

    The second has me standing in front of the display.

    The third has just 40 Golden Age keys on it.

     

    I hope someone can convert them to 150kbs, because I'm aching to find out if ANYONE can identify all 91 in the first pic. I don't think anyone can. But I'm longing to find out.

     

    Send them to me at divadrabnud@yahoo.com and I'll host them for you. wink.gif

  5. Something I've always wondered in regards to nicely preserved comics...

     

    Has anyone notice them aging quicker than newer comics if stored improperly? Take the Curators for instance. If I placed a 1964 Curator comic and a 1977 comic, both with white, identical pages, in a humid closet for a year whould the Curator pages start yellowing quicker due to it's age?

     

    Or to even use a more extreme example...replace the Curator with a GA Mile High...

     

    Jim

     

    What I have seen is two comics printed one month apart, stored in the same box right next to each other for 20 years, where one has OW-W pages and the other one is approaching CR-OW. I think that there was enough variance in paper chemical content from roll to roll of newsprint that it would not be uncommon for books stored in adverse environmental conditions to degrade at different rates. If this is true of comics printed a month apart, I can't see why it wouldn't be true of comics printed a decade apart.

     

    I don't think you can draw any conclusion from this set of "facts" 27_laughing.gifinsane.gif

  6. As much as it pains me to admit this.

    And I seriously doubt any of you know how stong the grip of a 15 month old baby can be.

    Let me tell you.. it is like a vise.

     

    There was a stack of Dracula Lives on my nightstand, and my Ellen somehow crossed the room, and grabbed the top copy in a matter of .5 seconds.. I am now the proud owner of a VERY crumpled Dracula Lives #4

     

    The silver lining is, I let her read it after that.. and explained to her how to handle the book safely.

    Not sure it all soaked in, but she did turn the pages with care as we read it. And pointed to any drawing that resembled a BAT.

     

    So we sat on my bed and read Dracula Lives #4, wrinkles and all.

     

    Ze-

     

    Zee - let me get this straight . . . You read Dracula Lives to a 15-month old? What next? 27_laughing.gifinsane.gif

  7. Yes, but I can't help it if he's illiterate. The description he gives doesn't sound like what the modern wimps refer to as "spine crack". Frankly, I couldn't give a rat's about any book after 1975 . . . sumo.gif

     

    893naughty-thumb.gif

     

    BTW, I coined the term "spine crack" and I'm not a modern wimp!! But I do want credit if the term catches on. acclaim.gifacclaim.gif

     

    Zip, you know I wasn't referring to your zipness hail.gif Oh and btw, what part were you 893naughty-thumb.gifing?

  8. thank you, wow ppl are nice to newbies on here. I know about the cracks perpendicular to the spine. I just didnt know if having the imaginary line dividing the front cover and the back be white from wear was considered a major flaw. and what effect it has on grading.

     

    Excuse me gents, but that describes a major flaw . . . gossip.gif

     

    Not if he's talking about spine crack... that is, the white cracking/flecking that occurs on moderns along the spine where the cover is folded. I have 9.8s that have light flecking along the spine where it's folded.

     

    This is most common on heavy paperstock and highly varnished covers. I wouldn't expect a newbie to know, but Diva, haven't you seen this topic any of the 100 or so times it's been discussed in the last year? poke2.giftongue.gif

     

    Yes, but I can't help it if he's illiterate. The description he gives doesn't sound like what the modern wimps refer to as "spine crack". Frankly, I couldn't give a rat's about any book after 1975 . . . sumo.gif

  9. thank you, wow ppl are nice to newbies on here. I know about the cracks perpendicular to the spine. I just didnt know if having the imaginary line dividing the front cover and the back be white from wear was considered a major flaw. and what effect it has on grading.

     

    Excuse me gents, but that describes a major flaw . . . gossip.gif

     

    It depends on the extent of the cracking along the spine. If it's bad, it's a major flaw. But if it's just the typical, minor edge cracking you see on Ultimate books, it doesn't get marked down all that much.

     

    We can only judge by what he says . . . and he says it has an, "imaginary (white) line dividing the front cover and the back . . . from wear"

     

    893scratchchin-thumb.gif Doesn't sound like "cracking along the spine" at all sumo.gif

     

    You made your point counsellor, now pay attention to the witness!