Then why are some like this?
Also im not disappointed but would like a more substantive answer on how it happens.
Then why are some like this?
Also im not disappointed but would like a more substantive answer on how it happens.
I think it’s possible for both to happen. Depends on the thickness of the printout, speed the pen is moving, how much force is applied etc.
It’s just as plausible as the cutting theory. A good observation, regardless.
The first batch of signed protos had the same issue :
Understood, but your argument is what here exactly? That the ones with the bleed were signed after adhered and the ones with the cut auto were not?
What about this card where it looks like the auto started in the corner and then ended in the middle? The other strokes on the card suggest that direction. If that is the case how/why is it cut off?
My point is that it’s more reasonable to think that all the cards were signed afterwards. Who would sign a whole sheet uncut? It seems too much wasted effort.
It doesnt seem possible for them to be cut like that (against the stroke) otherwise. The ones with the bleed - yes these look like they were signed once adhered. The others are too neat and i cant understand how you get a fat start like that without bleed. Itd be different if it were finer at the start. Right?
Even your example doesnt show that.
It’s interesting that in the same “batch” of autos you get versions which are cut-off and bleeding across the mounted card.
If they were cut sheets post-auto. Wouldn’t they all have a consistent cut-off and no bleed?
Its tempting to believe but not backed by any evidence one way or another. If some have the bleed, why dont they all? Same question, different pov.
It is possible for some to have been signed before cutting and for others to be signed after.
My doubts about these cards just went from 5/10 to 9/10.
True. The lack of consistency is curious.
From my perspective, not knowing how thick the photocopy or how well stuck down it is. It would be possible for the pen to just clip the edge without making contact with the mount board. This is solely based on my experience as a designer, nothing more!
As I said before, I think both theories are plausible. And this is speculation, which only the CGC/Middlemen could truly confirm etc.
Agree here
Can the ink really clip the edge and make a perfect straight line like that?
Earlier in one of the threads I pondered the possibility of original uncut sheets that were later stuck to card (partly due to the wording of CGC ‘Mounted on card’). I was feeling fairly confident they were mounted to card originally though.
With this signature issue, a couple possibilities I thought of were that he could have decided to use a straight sided ‘guard’ to prevent inking the white border after some initial trial and error or possibly because the paper is slightly raised in some case the pen nib would skim above the border. Other possibilities that have been mentioned by other members here are interesting.
I think this signature point that has been raised provides a good reason for CGC to clarify the ‘mounted on card’ element. At the same time I believe that it is likely that they were originally mounted on card.
Addition: Looking at the examples where the ink is seen on the white border the line seems thinner, perhaps indicating less pressure due to the lower surface/as well as lifting the pen? The lower surface of the border as mentioned previously could explain the lack of inking in some cases.
It’s possible…
Probably more easily achieved just by cutting post-auto!
There were uncut sheets in 2022-23. This is a fact.
Of the prototypes etc?
Yes. I dont know which ones but they existed. Ive had two separate sources confirm they saw them.
Were they being shown around before the mounted on card ones?
Don’t suppose there are any photos of the uncut sheets so we can see the layout and which Pokemon were next to eachother? Would be helpful, but wishful thinking, I know!