In 2016, Illinois changed their ID from a simple, PVC card design to a more common Teslin like material that began to conform to the Real ID act. While most states have been making similar changes and adding similar security features, something about Illinois’ redesign seems to allude people. Given that, it is almost accepted that most nIL’s are going to have flaws that range from minor to red flags for usage.
I will be reviewing this ID in that context: it is a hard state, but if the product is being sold, it should be usable out of state at relatively low security places.
I am personally super familiar with the new design and have had to check them before. I decided to pick up a copy of this ID from Lost given the good feedback I had heard about their Wisconsin.
Before I bring an ID out into the cold mean world, I do all the boring at home tests with the scanners and funny flashlights.
After those tests, I try it at 4 different retail locations: A Big Box, a Grocery Chain, a Gas Station, and a dedicated Liquor Store (Must only sell Liquor)
After That the ID is taken to two Bars/Clubs: A Location known for leniency, then just a normal club.
For me to recommend the ID, it must at least pass 2 out of Retail, and 1 out of the Venue Category.
As with anything you read on the internet, your mileage may and will vary. I look on the older side and have been using fakes for too long. The employee checking your ID is about 94 percent of this whole equation. The review is indicative of just my experience, which I have tried my best to take as much of the variance out of.
I have handled probably hundreds of actual nIL’s, both the U21 and O21 variant. I am familiar with the security features, and I was able to call over someone with a nIL U21 during the review, however they did not want photos. While I have the 2018 Barbook, its information about the nIL is actually incorrect in a few ways, so it was not really used for reference. Just as a note: That’s how confused people are by this ID, the Barbook has the temp wrong.
Anyway, let’s get into the category break down of the review:
Communication/Customer Service: [8/10]: Lost went through a personnel change during the ordering process, so I took that into consideration for wait times. Once the new CS was hired and verified responses were prompt, under 24HRs and coherent. Presence on FakeIDlist.net is good but over here on FIDV Forum is lacking by comparison. Would like to see at least equal updates on both forums. Pre Shipping photos on the website are a nice touch.
Cost: [?/10]: These ID’s were bought on Lost’s generous Spring Break discount, so the actual cost was around 45.00 USD. At the time 1-2 ID’s were 80.00 USD, however the price went up to 100.00 USD after the Teslin Shortage. See more on price at the ‘Conclusion’ Section.
Shipping: [10/10]: Following a trend of bad luck with this period of time for Lost, there was a historic backup and backlog with a certain Mail Carrying service used by the vendor, causing a delay. Updates on this were transparent, and once it got moving, it was there within a week. No issues with packaging, and Preproof Shipment photos w/order numbers are posted to the website.
Signature: [4/10]: The new Illinois signature style is slightly thinner than the old size, but not this thin. Additionally, the Signature was too far to the right, and on both ID’s it appeared there was a smudge (?) over part of it. While I won’t deduct further because the signature sent into them wasn’t perfect, the issues noticed had largely nothing to do with what they were sent.
Template: [3/10]: Arguably the template is what makes a good nIL so damn elusive, and this ID unfortunately bolsters that idea. From what I’ve read Lost put out a bunch of new states at once including this, and then recently (A few months ago?) refined a few ID’s including this one. I believe this ID was part of that 2nd refined stage. Given that, the template is still really off. First of all taking out of the package my first thought was: Who turned off the lights? This template is dark, with a predominant dark blue hue to the whole damn thing, when a real nIL has lighter blues throughout, especially in the upper left corner around the “Illinois” heading.
This ID doesn’t really look whiteish enough under any light I examined it through, and that’s going to be a major flag for anyone who checks nIL’s with even sight regularity. The whole “what shade of red is the ‘Driver’s License’ heading” thing: not this shade for sure. This one is too dark. Again I wish I had the physical on me, but trust me, I’ve checked hundreds of these, and this one is way too dark. Then once I took the magnifier out, things got rough. The only microprint that looked correct under both 10x and 16x (I usually don’t use or expect to use 16x, but I wanted to be sure) was the horizontal “Secretary of State” blue wave style print.
Everything else, as I’ve indicated in the pictures with red circles, is just smudged or illegible. Abe Looks okay from afar, but again, up-close: Washed out far beyond normal, lapel print is off. State Seal is not detailed outside of the very center. The thickness however, does feel right, so a point there. Feel with nIL’s is another illusive thing, and while it clearly passes on thickness and how it flexes and bends, the front and back are just too matte.
Immediately getting this in hand after feeling an actual nIL you know what’s up, because by contrast this just feels so Matte. Again, thickness is right on as well as how it flexes, but the front and back just don’t feel right at all. The thing that overall just bothered me were the weird smudges I brought up in the Signature category and a general look that can be described as “Printer running out of Ink”.
Photoshop: [10/10]: One bright spot in this ID was the Photoshop. This background and formatting were in line with how Illinois licenses actually show up, shadows were appropriate. If there is some type of filter in use, it really does look like the Illinois pics do.
Perfs: [9/10]: Another positive thing on this ID, they are In the right spot, show up under varying levels of light, little rough at the bottom of the state, but overall good.
Holos/OVI: [2/10]: This was the 2nd thing I noticed taking it out of the package. More like did not notice. I showed it around 8 different people to make sure I was going nuts, but yeah, the OVI visibility is very poor bordering on not being there, most noticeable is the lack of a visible “Illinois” in tri color between the Skyline and wavy thing. It is there on both, but mainly pink and not visible unless you shove the dam thing in your face and squint. The lower wave is also very faint. The only thing that shows up even remotely like the actual OVI is the top skyline, but that should not be brighter than the rest of the OVI, and on this one it is.
I can’t stress enough how not visible the “Illinois” is. Of the 8 people it was shown to, 6 of them told me they could not see it and were positive it wasn’t there. It took me a long time to see it. I consider this to be a red flag from an ID checking point of view. I have seen nILs that have been issued in 2016, and on those the OVI is still visible.
UV: [1/10]: If you can’t already tell, things went downhill fast for this nIL as it got to each new test. UV was examined in a dark room with a 365nm True UV light (NitecoreTubeUV). This is the part where if you took the ID to a real bar, it would get taken. It would get taken because the UV layer is incomplete on the front, and laughable on the back. On the front, it is correct on the right side, hat is on Abe correctly but once we get to the photo the wavy ribbon drops off and disappears. It is supposed to continue over the photo all the way to the left end of the ID. Checked in multiple lights, with a 395nm light, a cheapo Walmart light, did not show up-on either IDs.
Back UV is where the bouncer starts laughing at you: the ghost image is inverted, blurry, and so is the DOB. To be clear: this was the same on both IDs, so at this point, given with the lack of UV pics on Lost’s website, leads me to believe this isn’t a mistake, but the UV layer they are using. It is not good. A 0/10 is a missing or non-functional UV layer, this ID scores 1/10, it is there and shows up, but is incorrect.
Scanning: [5/10]: Scans on IR scanners, photo scanners and smartphones, but when it comes to passing…….oh boy. Let’s be clear: BCS has issues. I don’t know what API they use to make the “Fake” Distinction, but when an actual nIL scans as valid and this comes up as “Fake”, it was a sign I needed to do some digging with other tools. It was ran through a PDF417 datapull, and the first thing that needs help is the height. The printed height it correct, but the scanning height is in CM’s and inches, but not in the way you think. It just is wack. Other things, like dealing with a middle initial, were also wack. This will scan, but you scan it at your own risk.
MoneyShots:
https://ibb.co/7z3RQgk
https://ibb.co/YdxPHb5
https://ibb.co/r3R4KDf
https://ibb.co/K0VKD9H
https://ibb.co/NSyXSJm
https://ibb.co/Fmjq0tx
https://ibb.co/pfPB9mK
https://ibb.co/w6QtCpp
Wrapping It All Up: NOT RECOMMENDED AT THIS TIME- I do not take recommending ID’s lightly. An ID I recommend must pass all of the basic tests, and work in the real world with relative success. As for not recommending an ID, I take that just as seriously. Even if you factor in the difficulty of making a nIL, the issues in making it feel right, this ID has red flags that on their own would get it taken out of state. Let’s start with OVI: Any checker who has seen an Illinois before will be looking for the full thing, and will only find the skyline. Then onto colors: If you have seen a few of these, you’ll notice how dark and blue this ID is overall, and that will cause more suspicion, and then finally: the UV. Any bouncer worth their salt has at least looked at what the nIL UV layer is, or has checked a real one. If this one were checked, it would plainly fail. Because of all these issues and the funky scanning, this ID never left the house. Because I would not consider it worth the risk of using out of state at a low security place, and the fact that the issues were present on not one but both copies of the ID, this ID is overall not recommended at this time. Too many of the issues that get fakes taken are off on this ID, and I cannot in good faith suggest you buy or use it.
A Note: At time of writing the page on Lost’s website only has a scan of the front of this ID template, there are no other pics so I have to assume that the way it scans and the UV are how they are made by Lost, which is why I did not grade this ID as if I got a botched print-however, if Lost can prove that this was some type of mistake, I will update the review.
Additionally, another poster recently gave this same ID a 9.5. I challenge that reviewer to check the OVI and UV closely, and see if they still believe it is a 9.5.
Upvoted: tmac, randy, justinthetip, shoshosho, peterson312, EF, HomeDepotEnthusiast
Downvoted:
randy —