Ouuh, I wanna hug you so bad right now. No homo of course, or however the cool kids say it these days :D
I think they are all real. The only bigger counterfeiter known to me that is able to mass print in such quality, doesn't do the new fetches in foreign languages. But I haven't checked his lists in a while. Believe me. When you pick up one of these counterfeits unsleeved you definetly know it right away.
They literally do not feel like a legit Magic card.
If you are really worried take a loupe and look if the card is printed in multiple layers.
The counterfeits are printed in one go, so you can see the pixels within the text.
Real magic cards are printed like Artwork, frame, text and mansymbols yadayada.
And when the counterfeiters finally reach the point, where they nail cardstock, paint/color, and printing method exactly like a real magiccard - well, then they are actually kind of producing real magic cards, aren't they?
But I doubt this will ever happen. Why would they willingly produce worse goods, then they are doing right now :D
Ah. Now you really have made me find the quote from The Man in the High Castle. Authenticity is definitely a theme in pretty much all of PKD's works (what is authentic life in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, what is authentic experience in Ubik), it is in MitHC where it is most directly expressed:
Historicity is, as far as I can figure, pretty much what Benjamin meant by an object's aura (although not exactly). But would you pay $100 for a revised Volcanic Island that you knew was fake but no one could tell? How much would you pay for a fake beta Black Lotus? How much is a beta Black Lotus' historicity worth?'Well, I'll tell you,' he said. 'This whole damn historicity business is nonsense. Those Japs are bats. I'll prove it.' Getting up, he hurried into his study, returned at once with two cigarette lighters which he set down on the coffee table. 'Look at these. Look the same, don't they? Well, listen. One has historicity in it.' He grinned at her. 'Pick them up. Go ahead. One's worth, oh, maybe forty or fifty thousand dollars on the collectors' market.'
The girl gingerly picked up the two lighters and examined them.
'Don't you feel it?' he kidded her. 'The historicity?'
She said, 'What is 'historicity'?'
'When a thing has history in it. Listen. One of those two Zippo lighters was in Franklin D. Roosevelt's pocket when he was assassinated. And one wasn't. One has historicity, a hell of a lot of it. As much as any object ever had. And one has nothing. Can you feel it?' He nudged her. 'You can't. You can't tell which is which. There's no 'mystical plasmic presence,' no 'aura' around it.'
'Gee,' the girl said, awed. 'Is that really true? That he had one of those on him that day?'
'Sure. And I know which it is. You see my point. It's all a big racket; they're playing it on themselves. I mean, a gun goes through a famous battle, like the Meuse-Argonne, and it's the same as if it hadn't, unless you know. It's in here.' He tapped his head. 'In the mind, not the gun. I used to be a collector. In fact, that's how I got into this business. I collected stamps. Early British colonies.'
In even the most perfect reproduction, one thing is lacking: the here and
now of the work of art-its unique existence in a particular place. It is
this unique existence-and nothing else-that bears the mark of the his-
tory to which the work has been subject. This history includes changes to
the physical structure of the work over time, together with any changes
in ownership. Traces of the former can be detected only by chemical or
physical analyses (which cannot be performed on a reproduction), while
changes of ownership are part of a tradition which can be traced only
from the standpoint of the original in its present location.
The here and now of the original underlies the concept of its authen-
ticity, and on the latter in turn is founded the idea of a tradition which
has passed object down as the same, identical thing to the pres-
ent day. The whole sphere of authenticity eludes technological-and of
course tIot only technological-rel)roduction. But whereas the authentic
work retains its full authority in the face of a reproduction made by
hand, which it brands a forgery, this is not the case with techno-
logical reproduction. The reason is twofold. First, technological repro-
duction is more independent of the original than is manual reproduction.
For example, in photography it can bring out aspects of the original that
are accessible only to the lens (which is adjustable and can easily change
viewpoint) but not to the human eye; or it can use certain processes, such
as enlargement or slow motion, to record images which escape natural
optics altogether. This is the first reason. Second, technological reproduc-
tion can place the copy of the original in situations which the original it-
self cannot attain. Above ali, it enables the original to meet the recipient
halfway, whether in the form of a photograph or in that gramophone
record. The cathedral leaves its site to be received in the studio of an art
lover; the choral work performed in an auditorium or in the open air is
enjoyed in a private room.
These changed circumstances may leave the artwork's other properties
untouched, but they certainly devalue the here and now of the artwork.
And although this can apply not only to art but (say) to a landscape
moving past the spectator in a film., in the work of art this process
touches on a highly sensitive core, more vulnerable than that of any natu-
ral object. That core is its authenticity. The authenticity of a thing is the
quintessence of all that is transmissible in it from its origin on, rang-
ing from its physical duration to the historical testimony relating to it.
Since the historical testimony is founded on the physical duration, the
former, too, is jeopardized by reproduction, in which the physical dura-
tion plays no part. And what is really jeopardized when the historical tes-
timony is affected is the authority of the object, the weight it derives from
tradition.
One might focus these aspects of the artwork in the concept of the
aura, and go on to say: what withers in the age of the technological
reproducibility of the work of art is the latter's aura. This process is
symptomatic; its significance extends far beyond the realm of art. It
might be stated as a general formula that the technology of reproduction
detaches the reproduced object from the sphere of tradition. By replicat-
ing the work many times over, it substitutes a mass existence for a unique
existence. And in permitting the reproduction to reach the recipient in his
or her own situation, it actualizes that which is reproduced. These two
processes lead to a massive upheaval in the domain of objects handed
down from the past-a shattering of tradition which is the reverse side of
the present crisis and renewal of humanity. Both processes are intimately
related to the mass movements of our day.
Never ever in my life would I pay 100 dollar for a piece of cardboard. Even not for a real one. I'm lucky and own most legacy staples like duals, LEDs and cradles etc. already.
To be honest, a real beta Black Lotus would be worth 10 dollars max to me, as I will almost never have a chance to actually put it to use and play with it. Nobody owns these cards, so what do I need it for? To look at it? Or just for the sake of owning it? It'll rot in a binder! A fake one would be worth mhmmm 1-2 dollars to me. I could get a few of them to hand them out to my friends so we could enjoy some cool and casual Vintage action without worrying to lose the equivalent of a spanking new AMG Mercedes if someone spills a drink.
Just imagine the face of a 15 year old, finding one of these, randomly hidden in a draft chaff box at your local store :D
Or to put it otherwise, a 1 dollar brainstorm is much more worth to me, than a Black Lotus from I don't care what edition.
The highest price I ever payed for a Magiccard was 23 Euros for a NM revised Volcanic. Shipping included. Think that was ~'08.
What I don't get are these artificially inflated prices for Magic cards. Of course, stuff needs a price to it. And something more desirable can have a heftier price to it. But 400 dollar for a core card of the game? Yes talking about you Usea!
It's not like wizards couldn't print more of them. And it's not like the OG card from the OG edition would lose any of its charm or desirability if wizards decided to print a million Useas or Black Lotuses or whatever.
Alpha Lightning Bolt is still 300+ dollars even though it got reprinted what? 25 or so times.
Swords to plowshares got reprinted 35+ times and is still 700 dollars and more if you want an alpha one that is in good enough condition to even recognize it as what it actually is.
I think if Wotc/Hasbro keeps on refusing reprinting absolute core cards of the game in a manner so people can have every card for max 10 dollars a piece, counterfeiters will flourish. They are just getting started!
I love Magic, but I hate "pay to win" with the intensity of a thousand blazing suns!
The problem with Fake cards is that people like you will inspect them and prevent them from being played. If I can purchase a Fake card with a guaranteed promise that I will always be able to play them 100% in a tournament with no issue, than yeah sure I would. I want to pay for "legality" and not "historicity". Unfortunately, the two are one and the same in the real world which means that legality depends on the card's historicity which makes Legacy and Vintage have the same historical problems - mainly high cost (or age locked, i.e. people who have purchased the cards thirty years ago when they were cheap) and small amount of availability.
If the solution is to print non-historical rare cards, perhaps with the words "Lower Class" in the super type, that are nontheless legal, I would purchase.
I don't think it's accurate to suggest that being openly gay makes you immune to homophobia. A dear friend of mine who happens to be gay spent the better part of his youth and young adulthood kinda hating himself and others for it. But that's beside the point; cool kids don't say no homo because it's a dumb fucking thing to say. Also, for every gay person who's comfortable with it (kudos to you, seriously) there are plenty out there who are reasonably uncomfortable with it and don't have the context to know you don't mean it.
We are all closet bigots!
@Zilla
The ones you should be defending here, are the "no homo" sayers, as I was clearly mocking them.
I wasn't fucking with gay people at all.. oh wait
I suggest ending this topic alltogether and keep on philosophizing about overprized cardboard and rarely supported formats again.
Reserve list needs to go and staples need to be reprinted. Probably won't happen too soon, if at all. Proxies + unsanctioned tournaments can be a way for legacy afficionados on a budget. At least if you wanna play in paper.
Ripping duals out of legacy or replacing them with mediocre shocks wouldn't satisfy me. Taking counterfeits to sanctioned tournaments is a nogo if you wanna abide by the rules, even though I wouldn't care and won't call anyone out for it, if he sat across the table. Questionable if I was even able to tell when they are double sleeved. That is my stance.
Any other Ideas?
Ok, boomers
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)