- Enthusiast
- Members
- 1628 posts
I've got a certificate from the late 1980s, and much to my surprise, it's handwritten. Longhand, in reasonable but certainly not immaculate penmanship.
Why, in this modern era, would anyone still write certs by hand?
Why, in this modern era, would anyone still write certs by hand?
Writing a certificate in longhand is rather like one LARGE signature. It's a whole lot more difficult to fake a cert that is customarily written in longhand by a particular appraiser. One could easily see the difference between a real and faked cert. If typewritten on a xeroxed letterhead the only part needing handwritten forgery would be the signature.
Barry
Barry
...if the certificate is Dario D"Attili's, I believe his daughter started writing the certificates out for him in the 80s. Then he'd sign.
I happen to like the look of certificates of this kind (if the handwriting is reasonably attractive) The time I tried it myself, however, I thought it looked like a Rx script .![smile.gif]()
Thank goodness for laser printers.....
Jeffrey
[This message has been edited by Jeffrey Holmes (edited 04-08-2001).]
I happen to like the look of certificates of this kind (if the handwriting is reasonably attractive) The time I tried it myself, however, I thought it looked like a Rx script .
Jeffrey
[This message has been edited by Jeffrey Holmes (edited 04-08-2001).]
Here is one handwritten in french script by H.C. Silvestre Paris, Dated 1898,
I can get a better picture without glare when I get a chance and anyone has more interest,
its hanging on my studio wall in glass frame,
www.tcsn.net/greenvee/nfvuill3.jpg
Regards,
Mike Powell
I can get a better picture without glare when I get a chance and anyone has more interest,
its hanging on my studio wall in glass frame,
www.tcsn.net/greenvee/nfvuill3.jpg
Regards,
Mike Powell
Please explain the type of information contained in a certificate.
The one shown on Mike P's post looks like an automobile title.
The one shown on Mike P's post looks like an automobile title.
quote:
Originally posted by wolfnote:
Please explain the type of information contained in a certificate.
The one shown on Mike P's post looks like an automobile title.
Hello Wolf,
I cannot do you much good for content,
my french luanguage is limited.
I can get some closer pictures for you,
but will need a translator.
LWL?
Regards,
Mike Powell
[This message has been edited by Mike Powell (edited 04-11-2001).]
Sorry, my French is long-forgotten grade-school French. ![smile.gif]()
Sorry Mike, I didn't mean your post specifically. I really don't know what a certificate on a violin is. I'm assuming it's either some sort of sales receipt or appraisal?
Thanks, Pete
Thanks, Pete
I saw a 1950s cert for a Klotz. It was just a filled-in form, with the information filled in in longhand script. If I recall, it was not like an appraisal, and made no mention of value. It described the physical appearance of the violin, and included an 'in my opinion' statement describing it as work out of the Klotz shop. It may also have named the then-owner; I don't quite remember. The whole thing was not very impressive-looking.
Maybe they do a better job on old Italian work.![crazy.gif]()
[This message has been edited by Mark_W (edited 04-11-2001).]
Maybe they do a better job on old Italian work.
[This message has been edited by Mark_W (edited 04-11-2001).]
wolfnote, a certificate is a statement, hopefully from someone with the knowledge necessary to make the statement true to some degree or another, of who made the violin. In the modern form it has a detailed physical description of the violin, pictures, and a statement of whom the certifier believes made it. The "In my opinion" part was added at the beginning of this century as the result of legal challenges which resulted in the clarification that the certificate represents one person's, or firm's, opinion, not verifiable fact. A certificate is intended for long-term use, and does not therefore contain a monetary valuation of the instrument.
quote:
Originally posted by wolfnote:
Sorry Mike, I didn't mean your post specifically. I really don't know what a certificate on a violin is. I'm assuming it's either some sort of sales receipt or appraisal?
Thanks, Pete
OK Pete,
Let me know if you change your mind.
Regards,
Mike Powell
[This message has been edited by Mike Powell (edited 04-11-2001).]
I am very interested in the discussion of certificates in general. I have a fine violin with 2 certificates, both with photographs (so there's no mistaking the instrument), one from Max Moller in the '50's identifying my instrument as a Camillus Camilli, original in all its parts, and one from Jacques Francais, dated 1999, identifying it as a Bernardus Calcanius, original in all its parts. I find it hard to reconcile these 2, especially since I understand these two makers to have very different styles, but both dealers have/had good reputations. Yet another top dealer now thinks it may be Spanish (Contreras?), although it looks nothing like the famous one Shlomo Mintz has concertized one and apparently preferred over a del Gesu he has available. I guess I have to choose my favorite or take it to London and risk Charles Beare saying yet something else about it...
Anyhow, the point of my post is, everyone looks for certificates from trusted experts. I have seen Michael Darnton's and Jeffrey Holmes's posts about this and recent "erudite discussions" (ad nauseam in my opinion) over the relative merits of different experts' opinions, including debate over a certain "Italian violin." I have also read the recounting of blind tests where Charles Beare has come out as about the only universally accepted all-round expert, nowadays (although of course others may be as knowledgeable in certain defined schools of makers).
Since there is such a discrepancy between the values of a well-certified and an uncertified instrument, there has obviously been a big traffic in certificates in the past - authentic certificates "travelling" with the wrong instrument, etc. Photographs obviously help, but I guess a good copyist/or certificate alterer could, nevertheless, pass one instrument off as another... So, what does everyone think about some universaly agreed method of electronic encoding/microcoding instruments somewhere on the instrument itself that could be easily scanned, with the experts name, etc., plus instrument details. Of course the problem of attachment and removal would have to be solved, but this seems a possible way of at least improving the current quagmire. This shouldn't be too expensive, I understand.
Just an idea - may already be in the works I suppose - but anyone have any thoughts?
Anyhow, the point of my post is, everyone looks for certificates from trusted experts. I have seen Michael Darnton's and Jeffrey Holmes's posts about this and recent "erudite discussions" (ad nauseam in my opinion) over the relative merits of different experts' opinions, including debate over a certain "Italian violin." I have also read the recounting of blind tests where Charles Beare has come out as about the only universally accepted all-round expert, nowadays (although of course others may be as knowledgeable in certain defined schools of makers).
Since there is such a discrepancy between the values of a well-certified and an uncertified instrument, there has obviously been a big traffic in certificates in the past - authentic certificates "travelling" with the wrong instrument, etc. Photographs obviously help, but I guess a good copyist/or certificate alterer could, nevertheless, pass one instrument off as another... So, what does everyone think about some universaly agreed method of electronic encoding/microcoding instruments somewhere on the instrument itself that could be easily scanned, with the experts name, etc., plus instrument details. Of course the problem of attachment and removal would have to be solved, but this seems a possible way of at least improving the current quagmire. This shouldn't be too expensive, I understand.
Just an idea - may already be in the works I suppose - but anyone have any thoughts?
I agree with LWL that it would be a nice solution to have a worldwide registry, but to try and organize this and to get everyone to agree on maintenance may be very difficult, and may be very expensive to set up and maintain, particularly in light of the huge number of instruments, real and fake, and the geographical issue as well, and given the fact that not all the various professional violin dealer associations agree with each other on many issues from what I hear, there would be a lot of problems having some system or database universally accepted - that's why I like the idea of individual instrument microchip encoding by the experts and attaching, perhaps to the inside of the instrument somewhere - very hard to copy the chips, especially if the chips containing the data were encrypted. Of course the appraisers would each keep an electronic database as well.
Has anyone started anything like this?
[This message has been edited by TonyF (edited 04-11-2001).]
Has anyone started anything like this?
[This message has been edited by TonyF (edited 04-11-2001).]
Actually, even given the number of instruments out there, this is a SMALL and actually not very complex database.
The key difficulty is actually figuring out how to ensure the integrity of the data -- i.e., under what circumstances do you allow someone to enter data about an instrument already in the database?
(This is an interesting but ultimately likely not especially challenging problem in systems design.)
The key difficulty is actually figuring out how to ensure the integrity of the data -- i.e., under what circumstances do you allow someone to enter data about an instrument already in the database?
(This is an interesting but ultimately likely not especially challenging problem in systems design.)
quote:
Originally posted by lwl:
Actually, even given the number of instruments out there, this is a SMALL and actually not very complex database.
The key difficulty is actually figuring out how to ensure the integrity of the data -- i.e., under what circumstances do you allow someone to enter data about an instrument already in the database?
(This is an interesting but ultimately likely not especially challenging problem in systems design.)
And doomed to failure...
First of all, attaching anything to the violin is no different than the paper label Andrea Amati stuck in his violins in the 1500s - and just as subject to mischief via substitution or alteration. That's assuming you could ever get most owners to allow you to do it.
Ignoring that minor problem, you have the problem that there are large constituencies out there who have *no* interest whatsoever in any sort of public registry of their holdings (or those of their customers). The people who own the really expensive instruments don't want to be targets for theft, or might wish to avoid export restrictions, confiscation by unfriendly governments, or maybe even the tax man. A dealer who knows of the existence of a collection of choice items not generally known to the trade isn't going to want competitors trying to horn in on the action.
[This message has been edited by whp4 (edited 04-11-2001).]
The art world has already done this type of thing with the works of many famous painters, assembling archives of the works, and essentially grading them as accepted or questionable.
The largest problem in doing this with violins might be the nature of the ownership of the instruments--a very large proportion of paintings by the greatest masters is in museums. Museums might not *like* the idea of one of their works being called a fake, but they are essentially educational instruments and can be expected to accept their possessions being devalued if the level of proof satisfies them.
Most violins, however, are privately held, often by people for whom they represent a substantial investment, and for whom the value of the instrument, and the protection of that value, is a primary concern over intellectual issues.
The largest problem in doing this with violins might be the nature of the ownership of the instruments--a very large proportion of paintings by the greatest masters is in museums. Museums might not *like* the idea of one of their works being called a fake, but they are essentially educational instruments and can be expected to accept their possessions being devalued if the level of proof satisfies them.
Most violins, however, are privately held, often by people for whom they represent a substantial investment, and for whom the value of the instrument, and the protection of that value, is a primary concern over intellectual issues.
I agree with Lydia that the database design while not trivial is not particularly difficult either. The data integrity and how actually owned the database could be issues.
What I find more troublesome is that there is an acknowledged problem in the world of violin identification with issues ranging from sleazy business practices to outright fraud and deception and yet no one seems willing or able to take measures to correct the issue.
Maybe its too late to fix the problems with antique violins but shouldn't a method be put in place to avert this problem in the future for violins being made by contemporary makers?
What I find more troublesome is that there is an acknowledged problem in the world of violin identification with issues ranging from sleazy business practices to outright fraud and deception and yet no one seems willing or able to take measures to correct the issue.
Maybe its too late to fix the problems with antique violins but shouldn't a method be put in place to avert this problem in the future for violins being made by contemporary makers?
My thought was originally that the label would just be there as a "guideline" -- you'd use photos, measurements, etc. to actually identify the instrument. (Really good fakes might be problematic, of course.)
However, the earlier points about protective owners are interesting ones.
Technology, sadly, cannot solve social problems.![smile.gif]()
However, to me, it seems a little like license to cheat the next generation.
However, the earlier points about protective owners are interesting ones.
Technology, sadly, cannot solve social problems.
However, to me, it seems a little like license to cheat the next generation.
quote:
Originally posted by Cedar:
I agree with Lydia that the database design while not trivial is not particularly difficult either. The data integrity and how actually owned the database could be issues.
B]
The feds (in whatever country you lived in) would of course maintain the database. That way we could all pay an annual registration fee, property tax, luxury tax (since violins are all non essential items).
Not to long after that we would need a license to play with of course registration fees and testing fees. I’m sure insurance companies could prove that its dangerous to the general population if violins are played without liability insurance.
First of all, I don't agree at all with whp4 that "attaching anything to the violin is no different than the paper label Andrea Amati stuck in his violins in the 1500s - and just
as subject to mischief via substitution or alteration." That is simply not true - you can now, through the miracle of technology, on a microchip add photos, and a description plus whatever other information you want. We live in the 21st century - why would owners not want to protect their investment and why would we not want to protect history with the benefit of modern technology???
As I said before, I understand that it would be possible to encrypt a microchip so that it cannot be altered. Anyone with the right technology could decipher the information, but not change it, unlike fake labels and fake certificates. Any "fake" chip would easily be detected.
This is in fact the best way to "certify" an instrument so that the "certificate" always travels with the instrument - the key problem in my mind, since a database for every instrument is impossible. It also solves the problem with getting people to agree to list their valuable instruments on an accessible database - that owners would be reluctant to give out information on their instrument.
The chip stays on, i.e. attached to the instrument, and this would be an excellent way of determining who has appraised it and what they have said.
This type of idea has already been employed in identifying cars, art works, even people (talk of embedding microchips under the skin etc.). Why would it not work for string instruments??
I would still like to hear from the experts on their opinion of this idea of a microchip certificate.
TonyF
as subject to mischief via substitution or alteration." That is simply not true - you can now, through the miracle of technology, on a microchip add photos, and a description plus whatever other information you want. We live in the 21st century - why would owners not want to protect their investment and why would we not want to protect history with the benefit of modern technology???
As I said before, I understand that it would be possible to encrypt a microchip so that it cannot be altered. Anyone with the right technology could decipher the information, but not change it, unlike fake labels and fake certificates. Any "fake" chip would easily be detected.
This is in fact the best way to "certify" an instrument so that the "certificate" always travels with the instrument - the key problem in my mind, since a database for every instrument is impossible. It also solves the problem with getting people to agree to list their valuable instruments on an accessible database - that owners would be reluctant to give out information on their instrument.
The chip stays on, i.e. attached to the instrument, and this would be an excellent way of determining who has appraised it and what they have said.
This type of idea has already been employed in identifying cars, art works, even people (talk of embedding microchips under the skin etc.). Why would it not work for string instruments??
I would still like to hear from the experts on their opinion of this idea of a microchip certificate.
TonyF
I don't find the microchip idea bad, but that doesn't solve a number of problems, including the economic issue of people not wanting their stuff examined, nor does it solve the idea of who gets to decide what's what. I understand that a very tiny chip can be put in a 1/16" hole in a block or something. Just as easily it could be removed, and the instrument (let's say a previously chipped German Testore copy) sold as an unchipped real Testore.
quote:
Originally posted by TonyF:
First of all, I don't agree at all with whp4 that "attaching anything to the violin is no different than the paper label Andrea Amati stuck in his violins in the 1500s - and just
as subject to mischief via substitution or alteration." That is simply not true - you can now, through the miracle of technology, on a microchip add photos, and a description plus whatever other information you want. We live in the 21st century - why would owners not want to protect their investment and why would we not want to protect history with the benefit of modern technology???
As I said before, I understand that it would be possible to encrypt a microchip so that it cannot be altered. Anyone with the right technology could decipher the information, but not change it, unlike fake labels and fake certificates. Any "fake" chip would easily be detected.
This is in fact the best way to "certify" an instrument so that the "certificate" always travels with the instrument - the key problem in my mind, since a database for every instrument is impossible. It also solves the problem with getting people to agree to list their valuable instruments on an accessible database - that owners would be reluctant to give out information on their instrument.
The chip stays on, i.e. attached to the instrument, and this would be an excellent way of determining who has appraised it and what they have said.
This type of idea has already been employed in identifying cars, art works, even people (talk of embedding microchips under the skin etc.). Why would it not work for string instruments??
I would still like to hear from the experts on their opinion of this idea of a microchip certificate.
TonyF
Tony, you bring up some good suggestions, but they've all got vulnerabilities. Yes, there are a number of hashing or checksumming techniques that you can use to detect with a very small possibility of error whether or not a given string of digits has been altered. That string of digits can be used to encode a photograph, text, etc. The problem is that all such schemes of which I'm aware rely on you being able to compare the computed result with the central "reference" version - if they don't match, either someone has corrupted your copy of the string of digits *or* someone has corrupted the reference. Don't say the latter can't or won't happen, because human history strongly suggests that when there's enough incentive on the line, it does (and it certainly happens through honest error). Just a few weeks ago we had a report of one of the major digital signature companies admitting they were fooled into issuing some bogus identity certificates.
Now, do you ever intend to update that information in your microchip, or is it just going to be a database key? If it's just the database key, how do you protect the database from improper alteration? If you are storing actual information about the violin, like photos and an ownership/appraisal history, how are you going to update it without changing the encoding on the chip? Install a new chip? Change the authentication cookie after updating the information? Sure looks like we're back to square 1, or a logistical nightmare, or both...
Who is going make sure that all this recording of ownership and appraisal history actually happens? What happens with private sales, with no dealer involved? What about trades? There's also the issue that dealers may not want to disclose what they paid to acquire an instrument for sale.
Finally, where are you going to attach this item? What happens when the instrument undergoes restoration? For any part you care to name, I bet can supply the name of a Strad or a del Gesu that no longer has the original, or the original has been substantially altered.
Can someone provide an illustrative & descriptive example of textual differences between a certificate, a bill of sale, and a written appraisal (say for insurance purposes)?
What's the specific function of each especially when an instrument is sold?
Thanks,
Flyboy
What's the specific function of each especially when an instrument is sold?
Thanks,
Flyboy
quote:
Originally posted by Cedar:
What I find more troublesome is that there is an acknowledged problem in the world of violin identification with issues ranging from sleazy business practices to outright fraud and deception and yet no one seems willing or able to take measures to correct the issue.
In my experience there are people who are willing to tackle the problem but what measures can be taken that will have successful outcomes?
I think that it would be possible to "finger print" the instruments using grain patterns drawn from various locations front and back - say four predetermined locations both front and back. This would be nearly as hard to duplicate as real finger prints. This, along with a registration stamp burned into the inside of the back might provide all the instrument related id that is required. A permenent registration id with a means to document the correct front and back plate regardless of who is doing the evaluation. Once registered, the instrument could always be re-identified however many times it changes hands.
Just some thoughts to this interesting day dream.
Marsden
Just some thoughts to this interesting day dream.
Marsden
No comments:
Post a Comment