Authenticate This Chloe

[Lescoy]

Originally Posted by nickydutch

http://s617.photobucket.com/albums/t.../chloe%202005/ hi the energy in my empty batteries have grown in the night! i did i pay a fortune for it so just bough it NOW and then checked her out etc. she also offered refund if it turned out to be fake becouse she was possitive it was, so seemed safe enough. (and you should have seen the other items !!!!! gorgeous!) . Thanks for your efforts till now. am on the hunt for more empty batteries i might have kept for remote or something.

nickydutch - Hi - I'm having difficulty loading the album right now - I'll keep trying.

Meantime - can you tell me who the seller was? If yu don't want to post on the Open Forum - can you PM me?

[brigitte0810]

Originally Posted by nickydutch

http://s617.photobucket.com/albums/t.../chloe%202005/ hi the energy in my empty batteries have grown in the night! i did i pay a fortune for it so just bough it NOW and then checked her out etc. she also offered refund if it turned out to be fake becouse she was possitive it was, so seemed safe enough. (and you should have seen the other items !!!!! gorgeous!) . Thanks for your efforts till now. am on the hunt for more empty batteries i might have kept for remote or something.

I'm also having issues with this bag. While some aspects seem OK, others look a little off. For instance I cannot see a heatstamp inside? Is the one visible? If yes, could you post another pic of it straight on. Also the hasp engraving and the buckle look strange to me, could you take new pics of them really straight on? Then there is silver colour beneath the hardware coating, which shouldn't be and TBH the heatstamp on the padlock looks a bit battered, too. This could be just wear, also the finger areas are slightly unorthodox... So I cannot say for sure it's fake, but I am not happy to say it's real, either.

Sorry, this is all I can contribute to this bag.

[Lescoy]

^^ brigitte0810 - Thank you for posting on this paddy - your thoughts are pretty much as mine - I'm certainly not happy to authenticate this one based on what I'm seeing right now.

Its always difficult with photos - natural daylight is definitely best - and always straight on shots - but right now - for me - this one could go either way TBH.

[nickydutch]

Originally Posted by brigitte0810

I'm also having issues with this bag. While some aspects seem OK, others look a little off. For instance I cannot see a heatstamp inside? Is the one visible? If yes, could you post another pic of it straight on. Also the hasp engraving and the buckle look strange to me, could you take new pics of them really straight on? Then there is silver colour beneath the hardware coating, which shouldn't be and TBH the heatstamp on the padlock looks a bit battered, too. This could be just wear, also the finger areas are slightly unorthodox... So I cannot say for sure it's fake, but I am not happy to say it's real, either. Sorry, this is all I can contribute to this bag.

hi no the heatstamp has disappeared, you can only see very slightly that there was one in her young years. the bag is overall pretty battered camera allowed me 1 more pic of headon clamp but not sure if its showing ok becouse of light. thanks for your input

http://s617.photobucket.com/albums/t.../chloe%202005/

[Lescoy]

Originally Posted by nickydutch

hi no the heatstamp has disappeared, you can only see very slightly that there was one in her young years. the bag is overall pretty battered camera allowed me 1 more pic of headon clamp but not sure if its showing ok becouse of light. thanks for your input

nickydutch - Hi - that photo of the plate - it almost looks bevelled. Its still not giving me the confidence to authenticate I'm afraid.

I assume that you don't want to divulge the seller. It can sometimes help us - as if we are aware of them - we can have a better inkling as to the authenticity (although each bag must be taken on an individual basis).

Actually - I wonder - could you take a photo of that inner zipper - specifically the pull - it looks odd on the photo I've just enlarged and I'd really like to see it clearly.

[nickydutch]

Originally Posted by Lescoy

nickydutch - Hi - I'm having difficulty loading the album right now - I'll keep trying. Meantime - can you tell me who the seller was? If yu don't want to post on the Open Forum - can you PM me?

hi i just been looking for id but can not find her. she might have changed her name and moved from london will let you know when i find her.
thanks again!

[sianii11]

Originally Posted by nickydutch

hi no the heatstamp has disappeared, you can only see very slightly that there was one in her young years. the bag is overall pretty battered camera allowed me 1 more pic of headon clamp but not sure if its showing ok becouse of light. thanks for your input http://s617.photobucket.com/albums/t.../chloe%202005/

Hi all - i'm throwing in my two cents - it's still taking about 5 hours just to load a photo at the moment but i'm getting there!

Anyway, i actually think this one looks o.k - i agree with some of the other comments, in particular the engraving on the side buckle - it looks a bit messy. However, having photographed this myself, i know they can sometimes come out a little distorted - could you perhaps take a picture of this engraving a little further away and using the macro setting (if you aren't already)?

When i first saw the inner plate, it looked classic fake and scratchy, however again, upon closer inspection, the lighting in these photos is giving it that appearance imo and you can see from the first picture of the bottom of the padlock, and photo 17 (both of the second album) the difference in the look of the hardware with flash/no flash. Taking pictures of the brass hardware does seem to show up any chipping as silvery underneath and as we know this should be a dull brass colour - can you confirm the colour? It very much looks to me like a case of light distortion as opposed to fake.

I'd like to see the bottom and back of the whole bag and the buckle engraving again, but as it stands, i still think this one is probably o.k...JMO

[Lescoy]

^^sianii11 - Thanks for your post - I did say natural/daylight - and TBH right now - whilst areas of this one appear OK - I'm certainly not prepared to authenticate based on these photos. In fact - and TBH - I think a completely new set of photos taken in natural/daylight would be the best option - that way we can see everything clearly and properly - and not have to say 'well it could be the lighting, could be the flash'.

Its not easy as we only have photos to go on - but given these ones - IMO this one could be either way - and I'd rather err on the side of anal caution - albeit the OP does own this bag.


BTW - Its taking me an absolute AGE to load photos too - so you aren't alone - and it drives you crazy - or in my case - crazier!

[sianii11]

^^Agreed, natural daylight would definitely be the best option, i just meant it shows that even in one set of pictures taken at the same time, the differences that can occur with the light behind you, or being too close e.t.c can be quite significant. I really think it's the hardware colour/look that gets the most distorted but yes it would be better not to say, "It's probably the light" - though i do still feel fairly confident on this one, it's important to double check. Hopefully OP can get these for us - if she isn't in the middle of the massive thunderstorm we just had! I'ts coming your way Scotland - actually you probably had it already! :-)

[Lescoy]

Originally Posted by sianii11

^^Agreed, natural daylight would definitely be the best option, i just meant it shows that even in one set of pictures taken at the same time, the differences that can occur with the light behind you, or being too close e.t.c can be quite significant. I really think it's the hardware colour/look that gets the most distorted but yes it would be better not to say, "It's probably the light" - though i do still feel fairly confident on this one, it's important to double check. Hopefully OP can get these for us - if she isn't in the middle of the massive thunderstorm we just had! I'ts coming your way Scotland - actually you probably had it already! :-)

sianii11 - I think its always best to double check - and right now - we don't even have the seller to go on - which, as I said - can sometimes be useful. The photos IMO are taken too close up - and also not in decent light. A whole string of photos all taken at the same time and in the same light are necessary - and that way we can get a decent view. The colour of the hardware - the wear - it looks silvertone - and definitely shouldn't be - and we need confirmation on that point, as per your question. That can be due to the photos - but again - without knowing - its difficult. So in theory - we need the answer to that, another set of photos - seller if possible and maybe then we can be confident - Whilst in theory there are areas whereby this looks fine - I've seen a superfake like this one - and its reminiscent - so its best to double double check.

We've not had a thunderstorm - a little thunder yesterday - but nothing since - it'll probably get here - like everything else - eventually!

[bb80]

hi,
I'm new to this forum. I've read the posting policy and all the instructions to ask for authentications but unfortunatey I can't provide further pics of this bag as the ebay seller didn't agreed to send me some more... this is a already a sort of "oddity", I know, but I just wanted to know your opinion about it.
So, the item I'm referring to is the following:
Item Name: CHLOÈ CHLOE SILVERADO LEDER TASCHE
Item Number: 250456535730
Seller ID: jelena0805
Link:http://cgi.ebay.it/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...m=250456535730

there are a very few pics, but I'd be happy to hear from you!
thanks!

[woodstockeq]

Item number: 300326990210
Title: Chloe Paddington Metallic Chocolate Brown $2000 Retail!
Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...lenotsupported

Item number: 270420078594
Title: MADE IN ITALY CHLOE PADDINGTON HANDBAG
Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/MADE-IN-ITALY-CH...lenotsupported

Item number: 250455969656
Title: Chloe Paddington Satchel Bag Handbag Metallic Blue
Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Chloe-Paddington...lenotsupported

THANKS

[Lescoy]

Originally Posted by bb80

hi, I'm new to this forum. I've read the posting policy and all the instructions to ask for authentications but unfortunatey I can't provide further pics of this bag as the ebay seller didn't agreed to send me some more... this is a already a sort of "oddity", I know, but I just wanted to know your opinion about it. So, the item I'm referring to is the following: Item Name: CHLOÈ CHLOE SILVERADO LEDER TASCHE Item Number: 250456535730 Seller ID: jelena0805 Link:http://cgi.ebay.it/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...m=250456535730 there are a very few pics, but I'd be happy to hear from you! thanks!

bb80 - Hi there and welcome. I've just checked the listing - and as a rule of thumb if you request additional photos and the seller doesn't oblige - its time to walk away. I've enlarged these photos - and IMO this Silverado is fake - I don't like the outer heatstamp and the inner one you can clearly see the mark of the stamp - and that isn't normally the case.

Do of course wait for further opinion.

[Lescoy]

Originally Posted by woodstockeq

Item number: 300326990210 Title: Chloe Paddington Metallic Chocolate Brown $2000 Retail! Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...lenotsupported Item number: 270420078594 Title: MADE IN ITALY CHLOE PADDINGTON HANDBAG Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/MADE-IN-ITALY-CH...lenotsupported Item number: 250455969656 Title: Chloe Paddington Satchel Bag Handbag Metallic Blue Link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Chloe-Paddington...lenotsupported THANKS

woodstockeq - Hi there - just checked the listings.

First and last one - IMO look fine from the photos provided. Do wait for further opinion.

Second one - is a horrible fake.

[hardcore_harlot]

Originally Posted by nickydutch

hi, i uploaded a few more pictures. My batteries of my camara were empty and now my new batteries went flat after 2 pictures (and got 2 more pic out of them). This will have to do for now but will take more pics next time i can get some GOOD batteries. thanks for your efforts till now http://s617.photobucket.com/albums/t.../chloe%202005/

I'm not keen on this from what I see- some pics look ok but some I am not so convinced by- but I am agreed that photos in natural daylight would be best. then we can have a double check.