Dung's original argumentation frameworks have been extended in various ways. One such extension introduces positive interactions, or support, between arguments. Frameworks containing evidential, necessary, and deductive supports have been proposed, and it is natural to compare these and analyse whether translations between these are possible. Although a positive answer was given in the necessary and deductive cases, it was claimed that evidential support cannot be expressed by any other type and that it cannot be handled together with them in a single framework. In this paper we show that it is not the case and that there exists a natural translation between argumentation frameworks with necessities and evidential argumentation systems.