Member
|
I agree the chances of us both having fakes is pretty rare, but after the Depp fiasco hopefully you'll all forgive me thoroughness  Could anyone tell me which cards in, say, the LOST sets have watermarks? I've been checking all my cards and I still haven't seen one - they can't all be fakes (no-one's gonna go to the trouble of faking the cheap ones  ) so... what am I supposed to be seeing and where!?! My vision is dodgy, but surely not that bad... Thanks in advance 
|
| |
| Posts: 111 | Location: UK | Registered: March 31, 2008 |    |
|
New Card Talk Member
|
quote: Originally posted by mishu2nite: Both Jolies have been faked. The real season one does not have the watermark.
Does this mean the fake season 1 has the watermarks?
|
| |
| Posts: 2 | Location: Philadelphia, PA | Registered: August 18, 2009 |    |
|
Silver Card Talk Member

|
Oh man, see this is what I've been saying. Now everyone is worried about the high end cards they have and everyone else is afraid to buy any of them. Counterfeit cards are not new. Forged signatures are not new. Scans don't tell the whole story and second hand information is not reliable. You must evaluate risk before you buy. People shouldn't buy expensive cards without knowing that the source is good. That auction site does not police its sellers very well and PayPal is not the protection they claim it is. Often it protects the guilty. If someone is selling the same highly limited cards over and over again in unlimited quantities there is a problem with that. If someone is selling $300 cards for $100 there is a problem with that. If you ask where the card came from and are told it was bought by a friend or at a show, that may not be a problem, as long as the seller guarantees authencity and will give you a refund if not satisfied. If refunds are not stated in the description, there is a problem with that. I am very sorry for anyone who believes that they have been stuck with a bad card, but please get it looked at first hand by someone with the knowledge to make the call. This online information is getting very confusing and the card may actually be fine. 
|
| |
| Posts: 1422 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007 |    |
|
Moderator
|
quote: Originally posted by mishu2nite: None of the fakes have watermarks. If you have a card in question and it does have a watermark, your OK.
As much as I would like to agree with that some stuff has come into light recently that makes me question that statement. Kris -- the watermark is pretty hard to see, it shows up on the back of card in like a reflection in the coating of the card. Look at it like you would look at a refractors -- under light and at several different angles to the light. If no one posts before I get home I'll check the few Lost autographs I have to see if any have the watermark. Jon ____________________ Webjon.com is back -- blogified! And now featuring trade lists!
|
| |
| Posts: 2790 | Location: Chicago Suburbs | Registered: January 25, 2001 |    |
|
Member
|
quote: Originally posted by Raven: Scans don't tell the whole story and second hand information is not reliable.
A good scan can tell the story. There are properties with the cards that are unique, they are not identical, if they were, we wouldn't be posting about this. If you take a fake from the New York source, and compare it to a pack pulled auto, there are differences, plain and simple that can be seen. Most times the auto is the tell sign of it being fake, or atleast the starting point. Webjon, I have shown you the differences in real and counterfiet Jolies.
|
| |
| Posts: 18 | Location: Florida | Registered: April 06, 2008 |    |
|
Moderator
|
For certain cards, sure a scan can show that it's fake, but it certainly looks like there is more than one source for these cards -- the Chris Pine -- how could you have told that was a fake from a scan? The watermark is a tiny 'inkworks' logo that goes diagonally across the card -- the logos are pretty spaced out. The watermark will NOT show up in a scan, I'm not even sure how well it would photograph. Mishu -- have you had fake Inkworks cards in your hands? I haven't (to my knowledge). ____________________ Webjon.com is back -- blogified! And now featuring trade lists!
|
| |
| Posts: 2790 | Location: Chicago Suburbs | Registered: January 25, 2001 |    |
|
Moderator
|
That's awesome Chris! I know paypal has demanded other people send their counterfeits back, but they relented when people said the card was in the manufacturer's hands -- but I'm glad it worked out for you. Did you ever hear back from Rittenhouse? ____________________ Webjon.com is back -- blogified! And now featuring trade lists!
|
| |
| Posts: 2790 | Location: Chicago Suburbs | Registered: January 25, 2001 |    |
|
Member
|
quote: ishu -- have you had fake Inkworks cards in your hands? I haven't
No, nor did I have a Katie auto that I made you aware of. Just went from what others have posted about gbapack and packhood. Of course you can't see the watermark in a scan. And, I assume it would be to difficult for a counterfieter to do the watermark, which I probably should not assume. I do know when I see something that matches what I have been posting for what to look for. I do not have a selma auto, however have pics showing 2 different ones, one showing the doted auto pattern. I assume however that the indenting stamp on the front has been faked, or this whole problem would have been in the spot light years ago.
|
| |
| Posts: 18 | Location: Florida | Registered: April 06, 2008 |    |
|
Moderator
|
It is true you pointed out fake Katies on eBay to me, but that isn't what I was asking. You made a statement that "None of the fakes have watermarks." Yet the watermarks don't show up in scans, and you say you've never had a fake Inkworks autograph in your hands. I am also curious as to how you could have told that the Chris Pine was a fake from a scan -- I couldn't. My point is that there are some general blanket statements being thrown around here that aren't necessarily proven (or true). I think it's great that people are taking a good hard look at their cards, but as has been stated before -- let's not all panic, and we should be careful with how things are represented. Jon ____________________ Webjon.com is back -- blogified! And now featuring trade lists!
|
| |
| Posts: 2790 | Location: Chicago Suburbs | Registered: January 25, 2001 |    |
|
Tungsten Card Talk Member

|
quote: Originally posted by jon@webjon.com:
The watermark is a tiny 'inkworks' logo that goes diagonally across the card
.
It seems to be hit and miss with these, the X-Files autos i have do not have the watermark neither do Small Soldiers. Alias and Lost do have the watermark. ____________________ Come, it is time for you to keep your appointment with The Wicker Man.
|
| |
| Posts: 22060 | Location: wolverhampton staffs uk | Registered: July 19, 2002 |    |
|
Member
|
Thanks for the watermark tip - I shall look for it again, though it appears it's not on genuine Jolies. I'll post a scan of my Jolie tomorrow when I get a minute. All opinions welcome  Unlike the Depp - which for some reason raised alarm bells the minute I heard of fakes - I feel pretty confident it's the real deal. Still, I'd appreciate others views. I must agree with Jon and Raven though that, although this whole affair has left a nasty taste in my mouth, it shouldn't be blown out of proportion. I'm only concerned about the Jolie as it has been shown to be faked, I'm not about to start posting every card I own or work myself up into a fit over the issue. All high-end collectibles will be targeted by crooks. Even Sideshow have had their statues forged. If they can replicate those, cards are simple. Awareness is crucial, but I for one will continue to enjoy collecting. Just a little bit more cautiously and well-informed in the future.
|
| |
| Posts: 111 | Location: UK | Registered: March 31, 2008 |    |
|