Stan lee signature legit? 4 4

[shadroch]

I don't know if it is real or fake, but with so many bad real signatures and so many good fakes, I will not pay much of a premium for an unwitnessed signature. That signature,to me, looks like Stans signature from a time when signing the splash page was most common. 

I'm not an expert and am speaking only for myself but I would not pay extra for that book.

 

My sister used to forge her friends signatures on school notes and such. She would turn the signature so intead of going east-west, it was going north to south and copy the line as if it were a work of art, not a signature.  She was pretty good at it but I like to think she retired soon after high school.

Edited March 30, 2022 by shadroch

[Qalyar]

There's not really much science behind "signature authentication", even from the professional authenticators. For unwitnessed signed comics, ideally, you have some sort of provenance; you know where and when the book was signed. Unfortunately, most of the signed books out there are just sort of wandering free through the comics market, bereft of their histories. Now, for many signers, most or all of their signatures are legitimate, if for no other reason than because there's little incentive to forge them. But for a few, the market is rife with forgeries. Stan Lee, as a lifelong self-promoter, legitimately signed a lot of books. On the other hand, there are a lot of forged Stan Lees out there, aided by the fact that his signature was not really very consistent over his life.

This book? I guess it looks okay? I'm always leery of beat books that get autographs; sure, some of them are original owner books with sentimental value. Others are just because it's cheaper to forge sigs on reader copies than nice books. That's no guarantee that this is legitimate or illegitimate. But then, there really can't be a guarantee. That's why no one should pay significant markups for unwitnessed signatures without provenance.

[trademarkcomics]

Ummm…
 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/233504242823?hash=item365deffc87%3Ag%3A8~sAAOSwSJ9iHeaO&LH_BIN=1

[kav]

On 4/30/2022 at 7:39 PM, trademarkcomics said:

Ummm…
 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/233504242823?hash=item365deffc87%3Ag%3A8~sAAOSwSJ9iHeaO&LH_BIN=1

nope!

@Comics4All

[Comics4All]

On 4/30/2022 at 10:45 PM, kav said:

nope!

@Comics4All

Nope!

[oakman29]

I can tell the OP that THAT signature is a genuine signature. 

[trademarkcomics]

On 5/1/2022 at 4:10 AM, oakman29 said:

I can tell the OP that THAT signature is a genuine signature. 

Absolutely. It has all of the features I look for in a Stan Lee sig. I look for four things initially, #1-  There are exceptions, but he usually has a little curve coming off the bottom of the "T" that points into the direction of the "A", #2- The "A" is bigger than the "N". #3- A strong "hairpin" point before finishing off with a full or partial underline. And #4- (Other than when he got frail right at the end) a smoothness and confidence in all of the strokes---this man was one of the most confident men that has ever lived and it showed up in his signatures!

So, a forger may get 1-2 of these right, but they rarely get 3 and NEVER get 4.

[JollyComics]

Other auction company has several unwitnessed Stan Lee's signatures on ASM copies (non-key issues).  Simply, I passed them.

[oakman29]

On 5/1/2022 at 9:31 AM, JollyComics said:

Other auction company has several unwitnessed Stan Lee's signatures on ASM copies (non-key issues).  Simply, I passed them.

Smart. Really the only Stan Lee signature that I truly believe is real is the one I personally got from him.

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 3/29/2022 at 7:48 PM, kav said:

his cockroaches were top notch till the end tho!

[kav]

On 5/1/2022 at 1:15 PM, oakman29 said:

Smart. Really the only Stan Lee signature that I truly believe is real is the one I personally got from him.

even those you should be careful-could be guy made up to look like Stan.

[kav]

On 5/1/2022 at 2:18 PM, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

all he had to do was look at the spider on the costume! He had one job!  

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 5/1/2022 at 4:19 PM, kav said:

even those you should be careful-could be guy made up to look like Stan.

So it was signed by "A Stan Lee" not necessarily " The Stan Lee" 

[Upgrayedd2]

On 3/30/2022 at 5:48 AM, Qalyar said:

There's not really much science behind "signature authentication", even from the professional authenticators. For unwitnessed signed comics, ideally, you have some sort of provenance; you know where and when the book was signed. Unfortunately, most of the signed books out there are just sort of wandering free through the comics market, bereft of their histories. Now, for many signers, most or all of their signatures are legitimate, if for no other reason than because there's little incentive to forge them. But for a few, the market is rife with forgeries. Stan Lee, as a lifelong self-promoter, legitimately signed a lot of books. On the other hand, there are a lot of forged Stan Lees out there, aided by the fact that his signature was not really very consistent over his life.

This book? I guess it looks okay? I'm always leery of beat books that get autographs; sure, some of them are original owner books with sentimental value. Others are just because it's cheaper to forge sigs on reader copies than nice books. That's no guarantee that this is legitimate or illegitimate. But then, there really can't be a guarantee. That's why no one should pay significant markups for unwitnessed signatures without provenance.

I disagree with the first sentence. I would love to hear a professional 'signature' authenticator says, "Yah, there's really not much science behind what we do."

I grew up in a family business with books and document from as early as the 16th century. When a professional signature authenticator comes to look at an item, they walk you through the entire process. Not like the 15 seconds you see on Pawn Stars. However, if you are directing your comments at self-proclaimed comic book signature authenticators - I'm open to that. Also, there are specialists within field. Who we call is based on the period as well as subject.

Authenticating an artist's signature is not difficult for a certified professional. I believe the legitimacy questions of comic book signatures continues to grow as companies generate revenue by hosting an event and charging people for the signature and subsequent slabbing. Creating doubt in a customer's mind is a great way influence their purchasing habits. Back in the 1990s politicians warned Americans not to purchase prescription medications in Canada because they might not be there the real thing. And, look at the numerous discussions amongst CGC vs CBCS vs PGX. All you have to do if identify an anomaly and make that the norm. Wash, rinse, repeat.

In addition, the term 'certified' has expanded in categories: (1) No one was present during the signature (2) A business observed (3) Certificate of authentication (4) A comic book company that slabs comics hosted the event and saw the signature (5) and many more. 

Having shared my thoughts, it's possible easy-glide sharpies and glossy covers do not leave the typical impression another writing instrument would, but I'm going to ask one of the authenticators these questions the next time they're in the store.

[Snowlock]

I would have to dig through my collection to find the one he signed for me, but honestly, I would lean more towards it being legit. Stan was a great guy and he signed anything and everything for anyone who asked. To give you an idea, at the event I went to (I'm gonna say around-ish 2001... I think though I might have to stretch my brain to really remember exactly) he gave a talk at a very well attended library function where he was a keynote speaker and then went next door to the library and stuck around signing all manner of everything for the next FIVE HOURS until everyone who wanted his signature had gotten it. He didn't have to do that. He honestly appreciated his fan base and made a point of making sure to show it. If I had to guess, his signature is legit more often than not merely based on the sheer number of things he signed over his lifetime. I'll still see if I can dig up the book with his sig though to post a comparison. 

Edited May 1, 2022 by Snowlock
typo

[eee91]

On 5/1/2022 at 8:32 AM, trademarkcomics said:

Absolutely. It has all of the features I look for in a Stan Lee sig. I look for four things initially, #1-  There are exceptions, but he usually has a little curve coming off the bottom of the "T" that points into the direction of the "A", #2- The "A" is bigger than the "N". #3- A strong "hairpin" point before finishing off with a full or partial underline. And #4- (Other than when he got frail right at the end) a smoothness and confidence in all of the strokes---this man was one of the most confident men that has ever lived and it showed up in his signatures!

So, a forger may get 1-2 of these right, but they rarely get 3 and NEVER get 4.

To me, there's an obvious tell when a Stan signature is forged by someone right-handed. 

That's why I still lean towards the sig being fake.

[kav]

On 5/1/2022 at 3:55 PM, Upgrayedd2 said:

I disagree with the first sentence. I would love to hear a professional 'signature' authenticator says, "Yah, there's really not much science behind what we do."

I grew up in a family business with books and document from as early as the 16th century. When a professional signature authenticator comes to look at an item, they walk you through the entire process. Not like the 15 seconds you see on Pawn Stars. However, if you are directing your comments at self-proclaimed comic book signature authenticators - I'm open to that. Also, there are specialists within field. Who we call is based on the period as well as subject.

Authenticating an artist's signature is not difficult for a certified professional. I believe the legitimacy questions of comic book signatures continues to grow as companies generate revenue by hosting an event and charging people for the signature and subsequent slabbing. Creating doubt in a customer's mind is a great way influence their purchasing habits. Back in the 1990s politicians warned Americans not to purchase prescription medications in Canada because they might not be there the real thing. And, look at the numerous discussions amongst CGC vs CBCS vs PGX. All you have to do if identify an anomaly and make that the norm. Wash, rinse, repeat.

In addition, the term 'certified' has expanded in categories: (1) No one was present during the signature (2) A business observed (3) Certificate of authentication (4) A comic book company that slabs comics hosted the event and saw the signature (5) and many more. 

Having shared my thoughts, it's possible easy-glide sharpies and glossy covers do not leave the typical impression another writing instrument would, but I'm going to ask one of the authenticators these questions the next time they're in the store.

From what I understand, authenticators only give a percentage to their analysis.  Like "I am 80% confident".
Because theoretically someone can fake the lines exactly.  No hesitation marks-not a single indicator it wasnt signed by the person in question.
No one signs their signature exactly the same way every time.  There are minor or even major fluctuations.  Within these fluctuations a very good forger would simply be indistinguishable from the legit  signator.  
They can walk you through why they think it is authentic, like 'see the curve on the T", or "Notice the spacing", but this is not the same as a 100% authentication.  That is impossible.

[Namtak]

On 3/29/2022 at 8:48 PM, kav said:

his cockroaches were top notch till the end tho!

Thats what she said!

[Qalyar]

On 5/1/2022 at 5:55 PM, Upgrayedd2 said:

I disagree with the first sentence. I would love to hear a professional 'signature' authenticator says, "Yah, there's really not much science behind what we do."

I grew up in a family business with books and document from as early as the 16th century. When a professional signature authenticator comes to look at an item, they walk you through the entire process. Not like the 15 seconds you see on Pawn Stars. However, if you are directing your comments at self-proclaimed comic book signature authenticators - I'm open to that. Also, there are specialists within field. Who we call is based on the period as well as subject.

Authenticating an artist's signature is not difficult for a certified professional. I believe the legitimacy questions of comic book signatures continues to grow as companies generate revenue by hosting an event and charging people for the signature and subsequent slabbing. Creating doubt in a customer's mind is a great way influence their purchasing habits. Back in the 1990s politicians warned Americans not to purchase prescription medications in Canada because they might not be there the real thing. And, look at the numerous discussions amongst CGC vs CBCS vs PGX. All you have to do if identify an anomaly and make that the norm. Wash, rinse, repeat.

In addition, the term 'certified' has expanded in categories: (1) No one was present during the signature (2) A business observed (3) Certificate of authentication (4) A comic book company that slabs comics hosted the event and saw the signature (5) and many more. 

Having shared my thoughts, it's possible easy-glide sharpies and glossy covers do not leave the typical impression another writing instrument would, but I'm going to ask one of the authenticators these questions the next time they're in the store.

There are legitimate specialists in document foresnics. They're called "forensic document examiners" or "questioned document examiners". Certification through one of several certification boards (BFDE, SAFE, ABFDE, perhaps some others) requires a related bachelor's degree, two years of training at a document laboratory (and, for some of the certification boards, two years of independent document authentication work), plus a certification examination. Does that make a difference for signature authentication? Well, a 2001 study in the Journal of Forensic Science looked at exactly that question. Between Type I (inauthentic signature declared genuine) and Type II (authentic signature rejected) errors, their FDEs failed on about 4% of samples, which is a lot better than their random layperson control group, which failed on a little more than 15% of samples.

Comic book signature authentication, specifically, is fraught with complications. Stan Lee, in particular, did not maintain a consistent signature style, especially over the last few years of his life -- which is, of course, a period when a lot of books got signed. Even FDEs are likely to have a higher error rate than normal. And let's be honest here, a ~5% error rate on signature authentication is not real great to begin with in terms of confidence that a signed book is or should be worth more than normal. But, of course, a bigger problem is that the people doing signature authentication in the comic book industry probably aren't FDEs. The "other guys" in comic book encapsulation almost certainly don't have certified FDEs doing their signature verification process. Maybe the people over at PSA are certified -- the company certainly plays up the technology aspect of their authentication service -- but given PSA's issues of late, well, maybe not; either way, PSA's on-item authentication labeling make them a poor fit for comics.

Of course, most signed comics are authentic. This isn't sports memorabilia, and there's very little incentive to forge most comic creators' autographs. Unfortunately, the ones that are the most likely to be forged are some of the ones that would provide the most challenges (for various reasons) to an authenticator. People like Stan Lee, Frank Frazetta, Steve Ditko, Stan Lee, Gil Kane, and Stan Lee. And sure, even then, most of those "verified" sigs are probably legit. But there's a lot of them, and the unavoidable errors rates involved mean a lot aren't legit, too.

[trademarkcomics]

On 5/2/2022 at 8:52 AM, Qalyar said:

There are legitimate specialists in document foresnics. They're called "forensic document examiners" or "questioned document examiners". Certification through one of several certification boards (BFDE, SAFE, ABFDE, perhaps some others) requires a related bachelor's degree, two years of training at a document laboratory (and, for some of the certification boards, two years of independent document authentication work), plus a certification examination. Does that make a difference for signature authentication? Well, a 2001 study in the Journal of Forensic Science looked at exactly that question. Between Type I (inauthentic signature declared genuine) and Type II (authentic signature rejected) errors, their FDEs failed on about 4% of samples, which is a lot better than their random layperson control group, which failed on a little more than 15% of samples.

Comic book signature authentication, specifically, is fraught with complications. Stan Lee, in particular, did not maintain a consistent signature style, especially over the last few years of his life -- which is, of course, a period when a lot of books got signed. Even FDEs are likely to have a higher error rate than normal. And let's be honest here, a ~5% error rate on signature authentication is not real great to begin with in terms of confidence that a signed book is or should be worth more than normal. But, of course, a bigger problem is that the people doing signature authentication in the comic book industry probably aren't FDEs. The "other guys" in comic book encapsulation almost certainly don't have certified FDEs doing their signature verification process. Maybe the people over at PSA are certified -- the company certainly plays up the technology aspect of their authentication service -- but given PSA's issues of late, well, maybe not; either way, PSA's on-item authentication labeling make them a poor fit for comics.

Of course, most signed comics are authentic. This isn't sports memorabilia, and there's very little incentive to forge most comic creators' autographs. Unfortunately, the ones that are the most likely to be forged are some of the ones that would provide the most challenges (for various reasons) to an authenticator. People like Stan Lee, Frank Frazetta, Steve Ditko, Stan Lee, Gil Kane, and Stan Lee. And sure, even then, most of those "verified" sigs are probably legit. But there's a lot of them, and the unavoidable errors rates involved mean a lot aren't legit, too.

  Stan's sigs present a much bigger issue than someone who rarely(I'm not even sure that word is really apt) signed books like Ditko. This brings me to a recent event that occurred to me. In early 2021 I bought a copy of Amazing Spider-Man #38 that was qualified CGC 6.5 with "Two names written on the cover". One name was Stan Lee, the other was Steve Ditko. Now...I know Ditko rarely signed books. And when he did sign them it was even more rarely on the cover. However, there was something about this that seemed different to me. He even put "Regards,..." before he signed his name and I was pretty sure he never did that on comics. Still, the price was right even with the Stan sig and that looked authentic to me. So I bought the book and sent it off to...the other guys to get re-graded and (hopefully) authenticated. They rejected it before it even got past grading. When I got it back the tag said "Bad sigs" as the reason. They were apparently so offended they rejected the other book I sent and I know those sigs were good since it was a CGC SS crack out.

   So, fast forward a few months and I decide to sell the ASM 38. Of course, I stated in both the title and the text of the ad that I wasn't certain about the Ditko signature. About a couple of days into the auction I get contacted by someone with the username "ditko59". He asked if I was the one who bought it back in 2021 and offered me less than the starting bid(which was rather high). I said I would wait until the auction was over since it had a lot of interest. He then offered me the starting bid. I figured he must be a Ditko fan and I really wanted the book to go to a good home and not someone who would flip it, so I accepted. After he received the book he messaged me to tell me he was Mark S. Ditko, the nephew and godson of Steve! And that this book was originally bought by him in 1992, and he had it signed personally by both Stan and then Steve a while later! Apparently, he gave it to a relative who eventually sold it and now he finally had it back! I told him he should thank the nice(not so nice--another story for another time) folks at CBC---well, you know. Because if they had authenticated the signature I would have never sold it!

  I will now show you the signature. And, it's a weird one because Steve put these large squiggles when crossing the "T"s, something I don't think he ever did. But, it dawned on me prior to my knowledge Stan had signed the book before he did that Ditko probably penned the large squiggles on the "T"s in a sarcastic way to spite Stan...

 

I guess the moral of the story is that like so many things in life, you can't judge a book by its cover(and that is so true in "regards" to comics in general)!