As far as I know no one really makes a good new Ohio since the bottom right corner makes it SUPER difficult to replicate correctly. It also has 3D stamp on the bday and a very complex template compared to other states

I would be very curious in reviewing someone’s new Ohio since I am a bouncer at a large college town bar in Ohio

Same... If someone got this ID down I would be bringing in huge amounts of orders.... You a bouncer at Miami by chance? rang a bell when you said college town

We got a sexy one check it out oldironsidesfakes.ph

I can’t let any personal information slide.

https://forum.fakeidvendors.com/post/k92pscg0y0

Uncertainty Level: Medium/Low (Fake in hand comparing with BarBook, High-Res Scans, and other vendor's ID) Introduction: Welp, its that time of year (Larry Szn, Rona Szn, take your pick), I am always acquiring new IDs for myself and others trying to futher my goal of joining the elusive "all 50" club. My latest endevour was a large OIS group order and it is a perfect oppourtunity for a review! This is the first of a series, so more are coming very very soon. This is a special review because it is comparing the 2 nOHs on the market right now: Lost's and OIS's Now dont get me wrong, these are both very solid IDs, but we will get to that in a momment. Communication: [Both 10/10 ] Not from this expirence, but from previous expirences, I have had nothing but good communication with both of these vendors. I think Lost has sorted the new CS and stuff so everything is chill.

Cost/Value: [OIS 9/10, Lost 9/10] My rankings may be slightly counterintuitive, but hear me out. As for price, OIS starts at 120, which is a wee bit high, and Lost starts off at 89 which is much more reasonable. Lost runs promos, so the price is most of the time lower. Once you get to arround 10 IDs in your order, the OIS nOHs become 60 and the Lost nOH is 50. The reason I have them ranked as the same is that Losts is a lower price, but speaking Value:Money, OIS is better.

Shipping: [OIS 10/10, Lost 10/10] They are both 10/10 for different reasons. Lost is always farily fast and reships domestic, so nothing can get seized on the buyers end. As for OIS stealth is always nice, better at passing snoops/mailrooms.

Stealth: [OIS 10/10, Lost N/A] Lost useds 0 stealth, but does not need it that much because they are reshipped domestic. I have said this in other Lost reviews, but would love to see a "pay for stealth" option from lost, or at least a protective sleeve so the cards don't get scratched up.

Template: [OIS 7.5/10, Lost 5.5-6.5/10] They both have their strengths and weaknesses, and I recommend taking a look at the photos to see what I mean. Front: First off is color matching: How "dark" and "light" certian elements are is different for different elements on either. Lost's "phantom year" on the right under the OVI Ohio is a bit too light, where the milenium is over the Ohio state seal it is barrely visable/not visable at all, so It is a decent giveaway. OIS's phantom DOB is very well done, especially comparitively, but the nines in 199X have this odd streaking at the top round bit, not a giveaway nessicerilly but an odd artifact. The top left "microptint" under the "Ohio USA" logo, is not quite true to color on the Lost or OIS. Both are passable, but Lost's is very light and bright, but the design is right, OIS's is a wee bit dark looking. Something I want to commend both vendors on is the "with god all things are possiable banner" the coloring is impeckable, they are both matched fabulously. On Lost's, under that banner however, the microprint is near invisiable. It also has a purple hue and does not seem right. The Ohio state seal on OIS's is a lot more crisp and sharp, Lost's microprint looks less authentic. Now, text: This is pretty nitpicky, but the govenor and registrar text on Lost's does not look bold enough, it is too small, and the spacing seems wrong. OIS's is spot on As for bolding and things like that, the DLN is bolded on both, and neither look quite right They are both bolded and everything, but the "color"/style does not match my scans. Now I have no clue why that is and I will update this is someone from OH lets me know what the deal is. And as for the name, address, class, DD, biodata, ect, Lost's is much too bold. OIS has all of the text as normal sort of line thickness and bolding and it looks top notch matches the scans and what it should look like. Text-Too-Bold click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Lastly for the front, the photo background (different from photoshop, more on that later). Now, this is a weird one, I have 3 sets of scans of the nOH, none examples all officially issued, and it seems like the photo background varries... Lost's is the all white, and OIS's is the sort of background microprint continuing in a sort of halo around the photo. Full Front Picture: n-OHFronts click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Back: Ok, so glaring flaw on Lost's, and a pretty big flaw on OIS's: Lost's nOH is completely missing the repeating name right above the the class text continuing to the DD number on the back. That is a glaring issue. Even if the text is wrong, it completely missing is a complete red flag. OIS on the other has a name going across the back... but it was the name "AUSTIN BRYAN WALLACE" repeating over and over again, which is not mine or any of my friends names. Inked20190416-132735 click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Lost has 2 other glaring flaws, one is with the the barcode that I will explore later and the other is to the right of the barcode: The portriat. There is none whatsoever visiable. The weirdest part of this is that when you shine a UV light over it (I will go more in depth later) It shows up with a really well done UV portriat. Like what the heck? this one change could make the back so much more passable. As for color matching on the back, OIS's seems a bit too bright, but the lines are all good and well done, the portriat is spot on and everything. Again, Losts microprint looks less authentic and the coloring is way too faint. Now it is time for text. The Name/Dob/DLN on OIS's, like much of the other text is spot on, the angles are good, and it is well done. On Lost's, again it is too bold, and the curve and sizing of the DLN seems wrong. One of the peices of text that Lost got right is the DD on the back (kind of) It does not match the front's DD, but the font is correct. As well, the text is way too high up and close to the magstrip. OIS's DD text seems to be too small and not bolded enough, but it does match the front so that in my oppinion makes it more passable. Back click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Raised Text: [ OIS 9.5/10, Lost 5/10 ] Ok Lost, you are fucking killing me here. Lost only has raised text as the DOB under the picture. They 100% missed the raised DOB next to the photo! If ANYWHERE has a modern BarBook this is the nail in the fucking coffin. This is so visable on the front and it is front and center. As well, I am not a Lost hater (always) I love the Lost WI! The raised text on the Lost WI is high enough, and the whole ID is sexy as shit. The raised text on the Lost nOH below the photo is not raised nearly enough. This can be improved, valve plz fix. I give OIS 9.5/10 because the raised DOB under the portriat is perfectly done. The text is raised like it should be, and is easily felt. The .5 points are deducted because of the placement of raised DOB next to the portriat (on the left side). It seems that on both of the OIS nOH's I recived the raised DOB seems lower than the real one in its placement (more twords the bottom). It is fine and does not effect the overall passability, but could use some improvement. RT click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

OVI: [ OIS 9/10 (I think) Lost 6/10 ] Ok, this is a hard one. OIS's is darker and closer matches the scans that I have, the change to orange like the video I have seen, but I am unsure what the real color is suposed to be. Both versions have good shape of OVI and real OVI ink on them, but which is more real is hard to say, I will update this review if someone comments about this. As well, from the video, it seems like the OVI om the real one is slightly less orange than OIS's so that is why I took off a point. OVI click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Photoshop: [ OIS 9/10, Lost 8/10 ] Both are good, but OIS's is darker and more true to the real one. Neither are bad in terms of passability.

Lens: [OIS 9/10, Lost 8/10] Both are very good, but OIS's lens is the more tacticle larger kind of lens that Ohio actually uses. OIS also has deeper darker black text, but both are well done. Neither are perfect thats why OIS gets a 9 and losts being slightly worse gets an 8. The thing is, neither Lost nor OIS has a "true" lenticular device, meaning that the image of your head does not rotate slightly when the ID is rotated, but these are the best that we can realy get. Lens click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

UV: [OIS 8/10, Lost 8/10] This part is kind of funny, OIS I give 8/10 because the UV is alright, nothing too special, but the UV portriat is not as crisp as it really should be and the UV when using a 495 NM flashlight shines through to the opposite side of the ID. That is not the best, but passable. As for losts... The front UV is not multicolored at all, it is just one UV color (from what I can see under 495NM which is what is commonly used), but the reason that they get such high marks is that on the back where there is no photo, there is a very crisp well dont UV portriat... I am told that Losts newer nOHs have Portriats on the back... but this one has a good UV portriat? Its just confusing...

Card physical "quality": [OIS 8.5/10, Lost 6.5/10] Now this is super interesting... Lost's actual cards are thicker and closer to poly carbonate which is why he gets any points here... but the recessed cut for the Lens is not well done. It is not template aligned, ect. As well, Lost is COMPLETELY missing the DOB to the left of the photo! OIS on the other hand, their card has a much less realistic polycarb feel, but, their lens cut-out is emaculate and the DOB on the left of the photo is well done. CARD-THICC click the image thumbnail to have it open a fullsize version

Conclusion: [OIS 9.045/10, Lost 7.6/10] This round overwhelmingly goes to OIS. If any venue, bar, resturant, store (ect.) has a "Keesing document checker" book, and decides to look at your ID, you are instantly fucked with Losts as your ID has no left side DOB. On the off chance that somewhere has a barbook and they decide to check, you got lucky... I am by no means saying that Lost's nOH is "not passable" and "shit" I am just saying that OIS sells the better ID and that if you arouse any suspicion, losts will get you busted. There is the point that can be made though that because Losts has the lenticular lens and the "polycarb feel" it will pass at places where people are ignorant or go not check. If you really want an OH, go with OIS, if you have a Lost promo, pick the nOH only after the add the left side DOB and some other shit I mentioned.

TL;DR OIS nOH FTW

I have good nPA. Most nPA also similar to all vendor.

Lost is missing the RT DOB IIRC, so OIS's is better...but neither is instate I think

Thanks man!

You mean so they could go and use them in Ohio?? Yeah that's gonna be a no from me dawg.
No one has the lenticular right and in Ohio they'll actually be able to pull it out and check. Set people up with some MIs and nILs.

most people get the old ohios from me... but its getting close to not being worth it as most get their ID at 23 and expire in 2021

It also becomes obvious when the bar get flooded with Old Licenses out of nowhere when the new license is becoming more common everywhere else, see also: Why it is totally possible to make and ISP Old IL rn but it will get rejected anyway because they are all expiring and thsoe that haven't have gotten the new one