Assistance with Id'ing Fake Photographs

[Adrian Stevenson]

Dated 1941 but the wearer has a jacket which was not introduced until 1944.......

Cheers, Ade.

[Paul D]

Definately a dodgy one Bill , confirmed by Ade's comment on the uniform !!

[tempelhof]

Dated 1941 but the wearer has a jacket which was not introduced until 1944.......

Cheers, Ade.

Good eye, Adrian! that completely got past me!

[slados28]

Some GOOD Ebay Sellers

Koelsch333
FotoHistoriker
Engelbubu-foto
Lopesan
EA-antik
Antikfuchs1
ba-re
dragons72
fotohistorik
freshfound
gamsdivision1944
keithmydog
Isru31c
new-lsmft5
reichskarte
rwcmilitaria
therebelslacker
321..dankshehr
Milantik2000

The list could go on......but these are the more popular sellers which sell period Original photos.

Good to see that most of the sellers I've dealt with are actually placed on the "Good" list. Maybe creating a pinned thread to be regularly updated with info from this thread could be an idea? That way we would avoid seeing the two seller lists disappearing in the midst of this thread.

Here's the one I have seen tolzor1 selling at least two copies of... the back has a fresh-looking piece of black cardboard, covering approx. 70%, glued onto it, as if torn out of an album... paper is not marked and quite thick, I've yet to do the UV light thing. Upon scanning I found that the image is surprisingly lacking in detail, no real depth or detail.

[Bill T]

Dated 1941 but the wearer has a jacket which was not introduced until 1944.......

Cheers, Ade.

Aha! I didnt even notice that Ade! Thanks for the confirmation on this photo. I dont even want to know what it will sell for.....
Well.....lunch time over....back to work for me



P.S.- Slados thanks for posting.....will take a look later on, but if it were bought from "him", then it probably won't be a good outcome unfortunately. I think youre suspicions are most likley correct tho

[don_kihotis7]

It's nice to browse the forum during lunch break

[Bill T]

It's nice to browse the forum during lunch break

Haha I know.....I always do it! I usually come back to my house for lunch break so I dont spend so much money eating out all the time!

ANOTHER BAD EBAY SELLER:

mybutterfly1964

[Bill T]

Good to see that most of the sellers I've dealt with are actually placed on the "Good" list. Maybe creating a pinned thread to be regularly updated with info from this thread could be an idea? That way we would avoid seeing the two seller lists disappearing in the midst of this thread.

Here's the one I have seen tolzor1 selling at least two copies of... the back has a fresh-looking piece of black cardboard, covering approx. 70%, glued onto it, as if torn out of an album... paper is not marked and quite thick, I've yet to do the UV light thing. Upon scanning I found that the image is surprisingly lacking in detail, no real depth or detail.

Well, Ive matched the paper to an example in my collection......but mine has a glossy finished obverse. It actually might have a chance.....but I tend to be sketched out for you because of the sellers reputation

[ToxicGas]

Bill, you were right about that first photo being the first of many! Unfortunately, after Styx discovering a few of his to be fake, I decided to check back to this guide, and red flags are showing for some of my recent purchases. I'm not sure if I'm just paranoid, or rightly concerned, but I feel like I notice traits you listed as bad signs in some of them. Could you please let me know your thoughts, and what aspects show them as bad? An example of one of my concerns: the edge cut and quality of the photo of four men in a row, but then I'm not sure.

Thanks!

[slados28]

Well, Ive matched the paper to an example in my collection......but mine has a glossy finished obverse. It actually might have a chance.....but I tend to be sketched out for you because of the sellers reputation

Thanks for doing the compare! This one has a plain, not glossy, obverse.... hmmm, I'll scan the back and post tomorrow. I'll also be getting myself a UV light