whoopy12 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Hey all, A 1952 Rolex guarantee booklet I purchased just arrived today. Of course, after whipping out my loupe, also recently acquired I began to have some serious doubts concerning the booklet's authenticity. While not SUPER versed in different types of printing, lets just say I know what "dot matrix" printing is, and when it hit the scene (1968). Below is a thread I remembered reading on VRF of a similar forgery, and also a nice macro of an example of dot matrix printing. http://www.network54.com/Forum/207593/thread/1405105199/Need+help+please!++Authenticating+SUPER+RARE+booklets http://www.caldwellgallery.com/original_copies.html Check out the macro photos below and let me know what you guys think. Authentic; yea or nay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 That is not dot matrix. That is old school multi-screen printing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoopy12 Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 That is not dot matrix. That is old school multi-screen printing. Do you have any pics you could attach to support this? Just searched for 'multi-screen printing' macros and I'm coming up empty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezio Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Why not show a picture of the whole thing i Got a paper from 55 i Think if its the same i might to able to help but only Got a iphone to shoot pics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoopy12 Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I'm not sure a pic of the whole thing will help. I'll attach one in a bit, but my main concern is the printing. To me it doesn't look correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezio Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Was more if it was the same i had i could try take some close up pics mine i know is gen didnt Think thry were worth Much but Guess i might should sell it dont have the watch anymore anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoopy12 Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 It's the same one as this: http://www.rolexephemera.com/Guarantees/sub-gty-early1950s-master.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezio Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Sorry mate mine is the 1955 one close but not the same :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoopy12 Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Sorry mate mine is the 1955 one close but not the same :/ ah dang! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 For large volume, good quality text and graphic images in the early 50s, the newest best process was phototypesetting, images and text of the same color were arranged and photographed to produce an image carrier for each color. Pretty much the same as color ads in magazines until the newer computer processes took over in the 90s... The only better printing would be gravure (intaglio) which produces raised ink like you would find on invitations, business cards, and money. The photomechanical processes produce 'dots' because the plates have various sized holes that carry the ink, but the dots are not in line like a dot matrix printer, the youngster writing that one story I glanced at that you posted is an idiot. The magazine 'print' of the painting is a multi-screen photomechanical process, which is exactly what I would expect to see on old docs with graphics printed in the thousands of copies. If THAT old document were scanned and then printed with a modern inkjet process, the color dots would be run together more by the scanning and then pixelated by the printing process, and would show distinct lines and square edges that your document doesn't display. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbane883 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Definitely not dot matrix. Looks like typical offset printing to me. The rosettes are a normal fingerprint of 4 color offset printing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xpletiv Posted February 21, 2015 Report Share Posted February 21, 2015 A lot of dots there, but not a single one in that sentence above! Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoopy12 Posted February 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Thanks for the responses guys! I ended up returning the document, but now I'll have a much better starting point when examining such documents in the future Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trackpack Posted February 24, 2015 Report Share Posted February 24, 2015 Was the paper quite textured? Seems the ink was touching the raised portions causing the dot effect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1680 Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Was the paper quite textured? Seems the ink was touching the raised portions causing the dot effect? This has nothing to do with the texture of the paper, even if the paper isn't calandered it won't have that consistent grid. The rosettes are caused by the angle of the different colour screens to prevent moire. The screen itself is due to the exposure of the offset plate. I have to note that good HD printer can produce a print image that is very similar to offset but can be recognized by means of other details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.