Serial numbering auto cards would give me more peace of mind. However, I had peace of mind before I heard of auto forgeries.

I don't collect many autos but I'd like to know if, what I do have, are legit or not. Doesn't Inkworks have a watermark or something?

I haven't actually heard of any known forgeries with Inkworks, does anyone know of any?

I was thinking a couple of weeks ago about Billy Drago, who is well known in the card community for his awesome Charmed auto cards (where he'd write a poem or story or passage of some sort). He was in Supernatural season 3, and I was thinking how awesome it would be if he signed, but with stickers how will he give us any great writing? sucks to potentially miss out on that

I really do hope we are not talking about stickers here... but if we are, given the backlash against Topps and their sticker-route you can see why Inkworks would make the press release deliberately vague.

So the cynic in me thinks it is stickers, and if it is, well looks like its just Rittenhouse and Artbox stuff for me. I am so looking forward to X-Files: I Want To Believe but if the autos are stickers then I'm going to have to pass.

I hope Inkworks will provide some clarification after what I'm sure will be a bombardment of e-mails from concerned collectors.

It's Inkworks. So to me, sticker or not, I will continue to buy their products as I love the company. Kudos to you Alyssa, Andy, Sue, and Allen. IF it is autographed stickers so be it.

There are so many different ways this could be read. Topps once had a small hologram box with a code number in it on autographs. There are autograph stickers. There are things like on the racing auto above.

So, I am not concerned.

Honestly, I sort of feel bad for all the people that avoid an entire product just because they don't like sticker autos. What, exactly, is the big deal? Inkworks products have always gone above and beyond the requirements of trading cards, and I doubt the integrity of the product would be diminished because the autograph is on a sticker. Seriously. Get a life. If they feel this is a necessity for their products, my guess is they have a hell of a good reason for it. So kudos, all you great people at Inkworks!

Not to sound repetitive, but seeing as the question has been asked about what the 'big-deal' is...

Lets just think why an autograph card is actually called an "autograh card." Because the product is, or was, an autographed card. The new alternative is an autographed sticker, that is whacked on a card. They are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same.

Without sounding too trippy I think there is an intrinsic value in knowing that a celebrity handled the cards the fans will be getting.
Also, the holograms often look incongruous to the designs of the cards to which they are attached.
And worst of all the signer has no room to do the job properly - the piddly little hologram (in Topps' case) means they have to cramp up, abbreviate, i.e. change their signature to accomodate the confines of an even smaller surface area than the already small, standard trading card.

Oh and stickers are not always applied straight, so despite the best efforts to make the sticker fit the card design, as simple misaligned sticker just cheapens the whole thing and makes the card look unprofessional. Inkworks and RA replace smudged auto cards, will they do the same for wonky stickers I wonder?

Whilst I don't know the specifics involved regarding why any company would decide to use the sticker route, I think common sense tells us all we need to know.
The comapany says it is for reasons of quality control/authenticity, but if they are sending out stickers to be signed, how is that any different than sending out cards to be signed directly? Holo-foil does not guarantee and authentic signature.
Unless Inkworks sends a rep out to supervise a signing or they abscond a celeb to Inkworks HQ I can't see any way that the stickers prevent fraud.
Of course it would prevent fan made cards, but really what percentage of cards are ever counterfeited? I for one have never heard of a phoney Inkworks auto.

Or maybe, just maybe, the companies would respect the intelligence of their loyal fans and admit that the stickers, whilst useful in preventing fan made cards, are more useful in their later applications. The inclusion of Harrison Ford autos across the two Indy sets are a prime example of why stickers are so useful to manufacturers who can 'add' (or ration) additional signers to new sets with little additional effort and cost.

That is primarily why I don't like stickers: manufacturer convenience does not necessarily make for a better product. For the collector there is no real need to use them.

I for one don't mind the holographic stickers and they do make the auto stand out unlike those god-awful clear ones that Donruss uses. Those are REDICULOUS!

As far as the Harrison Ford auto goes, Topps haven't re-used the stickers the Harrison Ford auto from Indy is a cut auto (just as bad but different)

We've had this debate before, but inkworks still haven't said that they are going to be sticker auto's yet.

I agree with the stickers not suiting some sets, perfect example the horrible looking cards from Heroes II

quote:

Originally posted by Pumpkindiver:
As far as the Harrison Ford auto goes, Topps haven't re-used the stickers the Harrison Ford auto from Indy is a cut auto (just as bad but different)

The Harrison Ford autos are stickers, they are just mounted under the card like a cut signature, the same with George Lucas. Only Speilberg was a cut auto.

Maybe they mounted the more expensive stickers because it wouldn't be so bad if a the adhesive on a Molina or Capshaw sticker degraded and made the auto fall off the card!

I think its quite probable that there has been a rash of counterfit cards over the last few years. With the technology aviliable today it would be a snap. And lets face it, where there is money to be had, the scammers/bootleggers are on it.

Im shure some of the card companies/dealers would do their all to hush it up, as it could wreak havoc on the already delicate market.

It may also just be a pre emptive move to satisfy unlegitimate growing concerns of counterfit cards.

However X makes a truly thoughtful point, convenience to the companies. This should not be overlooked or cast aside. And it is convenient on many levels. Lets explore another one shall we?

A cheap sense of false security. Thats right, just like the NSA, if it looks like something is being done to protect me, then it must be protecting me....right? Wrong. The hologram sticker is only slightly harder to fake than the card or signature. True security devices like a hologram back,random foil stamped numbers (you could ask the company to verify the card on their database), watermarks, UV security printing(like concert tickets have) or embedded R.F. ID chips (my favorite) would cost a LOT more than a sticker (mainly becuase you would want to employ several at the same time). But would also curtail most counterfiting due to the expense and complexity(thiefs are usually lazy, thats why they are thiefs). So its a two for one, you get autos to use whenever you feel like it and you get a cheap sense of security.

I personally dont collect autos, but if i did i would say "sticker signatures can kiss my ***" It cheapens the whole integrity of an "authentic autographed card"

Thats my buck fifty.

really? I cant say ***?........WOW im shocked at this censorship!

*** *** *** *** *** ***

In their defense stickers only make good business sense.

1.It would be more convenient for the signers as It's easier to handle a couple sheets of stickers than a few hundred cards.

2.What happens when the signer is lazy with the cards or the WONNDERFUL post office handles them wrong then they get back a couple hundred damaged cards they can not put in the set and they waisted the time getting that person to sign. How would you feel if SMG signed for buffy and then all her cards were damaged in transit and they NEVER made it into packs or daylight and all had to be pulled??

As an autograph card collector (no sketches or prop cards, sorry folks) I will tell you why i PREFER the auto on the card, and why I try and avoid the sticker / cut autos.

A LOT of the sticker / cut signatures are not what I would call "representative" of the persons true signature. I have seen many instances where the signature has run off the edges and leaves incomplete signatures. Or, the signer purposely "tones down" their signature to fit onto the sticker / cut.

~Stickers applied crooked.
~stickers applied to the wrong card (mainly happens in sports cards).
~stickers peeling off the card.
~cut signatures covered by a portion of the card cut out area

Another main reason I prefer the on card signature has been mentioned several times -- the signer actually had the card in their hand to sign --

Finally (not intentionally being morbid, just giving my view). With signed stickers in hand, a company could very easily release "certified autograph" cards of a person well after they are deceased. That does not appeal to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Streich:
In their defense stickers only make good business sense.

1.It would be more convenient for the signers as It's easier to handle a couple sheets of stickers than a few hundred cards.

Unless they are a little thick I'm sure they could handle either.

2.What happens when the signer is lazy with the cards or the WONNDERFUL post office handles them wrong then they get back a couple hundred damaged cards they can not put in the set and they waisted the time getting that person to sign. How would you feel if SMG signed for buffy and then all her cards were damaged in transit and they NEVER made it into packs or daylight and all had to be pulled??

Firstly, I don't think we'd hear about it so we wouldn't feel any sense of loss. Secondly, for any signer, and especially 'big' ones I'd like to think the card companies would have enough common sense to ship a 'bullet-proof' ultra pro box or the like to have the cards sent in.
I'm sure that would be easy for the signer to operate and unless the PO rolled a lorry over the package I think the equivalent of a plastic brick would arrive intact.

Speaking of shipping, I actually think it would be much more difficult to securely ship sheets of stickers without damaging them. I shudder at the thought of recieving sell-sheets from any destination because even with layer upon layer of cardboard or even plastic sheets, bends and knocks seem to be inevitable.

And at least you can trim the edges of cards should knocks ever occur. Damage a sticker and it would have to be tossed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: X,

Not to keep harping on about it, but re-reading the announcement I do think it will be the horrible auto stickers. If it were a holgram on the back with a number, or equivalent to a watermark, they wouldn't even need to mention it to customers beforehand, it could just be there without causing offense. It would be a nice little addition that would not warrant a warning sign on the front page of the company website.

I just find it bizarre that Inkworks appear to be going this route, given the unhappiness over Topps's decision to use stickers. Topps is not the example to the followed in any circumstance.

In terms of fan/collector's favourite companies it always seems to have been a two horse race: Inworks vs. Rittenhouse (no denying Topps lands some great licences) but Inkworks will seriously fall in my opinion if stickers are used.

That said, I can see the harcore Inkworks fans defending the company to the hilt because its one thing if the 'evil-monster corporation' Topps does it, but if the small and lovely and ever friendly Inkworks do it, it must be because, as mentioned above, they "have a hell of a good reason for it." This sentimentality should not bias the argument, Rittenhouse and Artbox will now be the big two for providing old-school (I would argue 'REAL') autograph cards. They will dominate what some manufacturers seem to think is a niche interest when it is anything but.

I also expect people to hurl the usual, "you don't like it, so don't buy it, stop whinging" mentality but does anybody else think it is slightly wrong for manufacturers to gouge their supporters irrespective of their opinions? Yes collectors don't have to buy anything but when manufacturers have a strangle hold on the hobbies we enjoy, they do coerce people to buy products they are not entirely happy with. And if people do buy, which is hardly surprising, they unfortunately pacify the problem as manufacturers think there is no problem. Consequently they can keep getting away with these brilliant little initiatives.

Whilst I think it is great that some collectors do not mind stickers, if you were asked which you honestly preferred; the autographed card, or the autographed sticker-on-card, what would be your answer? Without sounding presumptive I'd wager the former, which is why sticker autos suck ***.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: X,

if i can peal off a sticker
and put it on a car
would that make it an autographed car?
just wondering

and to anyone saying whats the big deal
the big deal is stickers are UGLY
and i will not support ANY company
that give us this ****
stickers are only there for the company's job to be easier
no way are they there for authenticity
that is just a LIE
with all the stuff inkworks already does
i doubt people go through the trouble of forging inkworks cards
i mean they don't have that many worth big money anyways
so as i said stickers for security reasons
is a big fat LIE

The future will be a highly encrypted digital signature you can download online via redemption code and print it on your also downloaded autograph card. Next to it you find a link to a "secret" youtube video where you can see the actor signing on a "secret" device converting his signature to the "secret highly encrypted not copyable" download file. More authentication is not possible.
The only point is you still won't have an authentic autograph...

quote:

Unless they are mentally challenged in some way I'm sure they could handle either!

Wow having a father who lost brain function because of a stroke I find this comment HIGHLY offensive and will not bother commenting on the topic anymore..

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Streich:

quote:

Unless they are mentally challenged in some way I'm sure they could handle either!

Wow having a father who lost brain function because of a stroke I find this comment HIGHLY offensive and will not bother commenting on the topic anymore..

I'm sorry - I didn't mean my slap-dash comment to cause any personal offence.

I just meant to say that in terms of what is 'easier,' be it cards or stickers, we're really just splitting hairs. You should give signers a little more credit.

(I've amended the original post.)

I don't mind sticker autographs, just as long as Inkworks use larger sized stickers than Topps do. Those small sized things are just too small to fit a large/fancy signature on. There's no rule that the stickers all have to be that one set size, is there?

A question though, if it was forgeries they were worried about, why don't they just emboss the autograph cards instead? They did it with the Eliza Dushku autographs from Angel for security reasons and that doesn't seem to bother people as much.