Verification for Cary grant | Item # 1262
Autograph Authentication – Cary Grant
Confidence Grade: B (Likely Authentic)
Overview
This analysis evaluates a signature purported to be of Cary Grant on a beige card using forensic signature authentication methodologies. At high magnification (simulated 10x), detailed stroke, ink, and substrate characteristics were examined to assess for signs of reproduction such as autopen use, printed forgeries, or photocopies.
Candidate Identity (Investigative):
- Top Candidate: Cary Grant – High Confidence
- The formation of the capital “C” and stylized “G” matches known exemplars; consistent slant, rhythm, and entry strokes seen in other authenticated signatures.
- No other plausible identity candidates observed based on grapheme structure or flourish patterns.
Forensic Ink and Substrate Evaluation
-
Ink Type & Distribution:
-
Ink appears to be consistent with a felt-tip pen or bold fountain pen, with slightly pooled starts and strong opacity.
-
Natural feathering visible at several points of high pressure, which strongly argues against mechanical production.
-
Significant pressure variation throughout – heaviest in downstrokes and beginnings of loops.
-
Substrate Interaction:
-
The signature was applied on slightly aged, matte finish paper stock.
-
Faint absorption fringes along stroke edges suggest ink penetrated fibers, consistent with hand application.
-
No signs of inkjet dot patterning, glossy toner lifting (laser), or pixel granulation (scan artifact), eliminating machine and printed reproduction theories.
Individual Signature Analysis
-
Stroke Mechanics:
-
Entry/exit strokes vary naturally; note the sharp snap-back on the final stroke of the “t” and smooth entry curve of “C”.
-
Pen lifts are consistent with typical hand rhythm—e.g., visible pause before transitioning from “Cary” to “Grant”.
-
Flourish Dynamics:
-
The bold sweeping curve in the capital “G” demonstrates real-time velocity control, with subtle tapering at termini.
-
Pressure is modulated during loops (see crossover in “G”), indicating manual dexterity and live-flow control.
-
Letter Formation:
-
The inline connection between “a” and “r” in “Cary” and the upward hook of “t” in “Grant” show non-template variability.
-
Downstrokes are not uniform, ruling out Autopen replication.
Collective Signature Analysis
- The execution is fluid and dynamic across the entire name without signs of mechanical regularity.
- Natural asymmetries between mirrored letterforms (e.g., twins “r”) and stroke acceleration patterns are consistent with freehand motion.
- No evidence of repetition, pixel symmetry, or mechanical plotting.
- No inscription or supplemental text is present on the card – authentication hinges entirely on the signature fidelity.
Red Flags
Despite general support for hand-authentication, one minor yellow flag is noted:
- Lack of Provenance: No documentation provided regarding how, when, or from where this autograph was obtained. While not necessarily indicative of fraud, lack of contextual history reduces confidence somewhat.
However, forensic observations show no indication of:
- Autopen template use
- Scan or photocopy residue
- Dot-matrix or toner edge effects
- Overlay mismatch between ink and substrate
Market Comparison and Similar Item Sales
Comparable Authenticated Cary Grant Signature Sales:
-
Heritage Auctions (Lot #34172)
-
Autographed card, no inscription — sold for $512 (Grade: PSA/DNA Cert).
-
Similar form and proportion, consistent with specimen here.
-
RR Auction, April 2023
-
Signed photograph with matching “Cary Grant” structure (bold “C”, fancy “G”) — sold for $1,100.
-
eBay listing (Verified, Authenticated w/JSA)
-
Typed letter signed “Cary Grant” — comparable formation (looped “G”, angular “t”) — $650.
These comparisons support plausibility in form and ink layout with our submitted specimen; however, exact price point would depend on provenance and inscription presence.
Final Conclusion:
This signed card contains evidence strongly supporting a hand-signed and not mechanically reproduced or printed signature. While the lack of provenance introduces some moderate uncertainty, forensic ink/substrate relationship and stroke variance support authenticity.
Confidence Grade: B (Likely Authentic)
Submitted Image:
