How to authenticate a wet signature.

The early photocopiers copiers were unresponsive to blue. I kept a sheet of orhange lighting gel beside our office one since it made the blue look black.

Many official documents in the UK insist on black ink and if you go over the line of the signature box it is invalid, eg Passport form Last national survey.

Problem is the initial document was typed (less signature) on a word document then printed. So all 3 documents have been printed on a laser printer / copier so all would show dots I assume.

We used blue-black ink. It was blue when you used it but turned black over time.

This may be from the camera taking the macro images and doesn't indicate original or copy. Once you take a digital photo of all items the differences may be less obvious. A straight scanned copy is not likely to have JPEG compression artifacts.

I would look at the documents under a magnifying glass at places where two lines cross such as in the "e". It may be possible to see on the original that one line cuts through the other - on top of it

Update: They finally accepted the `original` despite the fact it was mistakenly stamped as a `copy` What had apparently happened was when first submitted and explanation given it went to their `back office` and a second person read `copy` and rejected it. When submitted for a second time we gave a letter of explanation attached and they were quite happy with that and passed the documents.

Thanks all for your input as it did help to reinforce what I thought was the original document.

But the original will show one set of dots, and the two copies will show or iginal + copying dots, assuming the original dots copied. Even if the origi nal dots didn't get copied, you will have a pair with matching dots and a d ifferent document, which is the original.

Owain

I always thought that was because early copiers and scanners couldn't see blue ink. Now that all such scanners have been superseded, it would make sense to allow blue.

I have to sign off other people's drawings and documents at work and the standard is that the signature must be in black, but I have worked in other places where the standard is blue - specifically so that the original can be identified amongst black and white copies, pdfs, etc.

SteveW

I have had the documents passed now, however, regarding the yellow dots I tested this with blue light and a 10x loupe and none had them. This printed documents from 3 seperate sources.

Having said that my copies are on an old laser B&W only Other copy done at PO and most likely B&W only printer And the other was from the sheriffs office possibly just B&W printer also. I suspect the yellow dots only applies to colour laser printers.

The first office photocopier I used would, apparently, only copy carbon

- so black printing and typing was OK, but not ball point of any colour. We had to write our reports with pencil. No idea the technology.

Surely the pen written one will have dents where it was signed. Brian

Scanners and cameras provide the same output. Both can produce raw or compressed images.

I would have expected that but the person that signed the document had all but lost the power in his arms, eating and drinking were difficult for him. So would probably not have leaned heavily enough.

Wouldn't that orange gel also make the true blacks less contrasty for the copier?

Just examine the signature?

Quink washable blue ink. ball-points were forbidden. Circa 1968

For some reason, the schoolkids in France used to be encouraged to use purple ink. Also washable.

Rub some lens clening tissue over the original. Some of the biro ink will come off.

Blue-black ink in inkwells with steel pens in primary school. Fountain pens (which we had to provide) in secondary. No ball pens except for rough. (Do kids still use rough books? Silly question. I don't suppose they write at all. Do you know that Swedish schoolkids used to use typewriters?)