Photo Authentication Service (Idle thoughts)

[drc]

I've thought more than once about starting an examination service, but there have always been reasons holding me back:

1) Liability, insurance, security, etc. And paperwork. As I once said before, writing an LOA is 20 percent examining the item, and 80 percent paperwork/shipping etc.
2) In life I only like dealing with honest people. So far I have written a few LOAs, but for people I know or know of. I also have examined photos for auction houses, etc-- but that's a different situation . . . Somone shadowy sending me a large stack of 1915 Babe Ruth cabinets doesn't appeal to me.
3) The $$$$ focus of the hobby can be a turnoff for me. Of course, I understand and appreciate that people buy and sell their stuff, and might want an LOA to facilitate sale. I've myself have bought and sold on eBay, and desired to make money on my sales. But sometimes things can be be too focused on $$. Items are judge solely by what they sold for.
4) I'd offer my opinion. I don't particularly like the word 'authentication.' And I ain't no insurance company. I never in my life aspired to be run an insurance company.

What I always have enjoyed is photos and identifying then. Over the years, I've realized the hobby I enjoy the most is playing Junior Sherlock Holmes.

I'll finish with an interesting Abraham Lincoln photo. No cropping to the image:

http://rrauction.k2imgs.com/content/images/larger/3274/3274384_1.jpg

[Tsaiko]

I'll finish with an interesting Abraham Lincoln photo. No cropping to the image:

http://rrauction.k2imgs.com/content/images/larger/3274/3274384_1.jpg

Interesting? F'n Amazing!!!

[BigJJ]

Best of luck with regard to your decision.

If opinion is sought today, it is - for Type (1,2,3,4) assignment - and for photo identification research - who the photographer and/or photo/news company is, when the picture was taken, where the picture was taken, and who the picture is of. This board has filled in on the latter.

Been much focus on type (1,2,3,4) identification instead of the true research arm. There is nothing prohibiting an authentication letter from adding interesting background regarding the import of the photo. In other words, with regard to authentication today, there is much slabbing, assigning, numbering, rather than bringing the piece to life with actually exciting information on the piece.
But if you give us who took the photo and when (which often takes much research) - and Why (this is a Huge missing part in my opinion today) - is this likely a circa 1860 photo as Abe has no beard, was it likely taken at the White House, in a certain room, shortly after being sworn in, at the very onset of the Civil War - for the purpose of - presenting the newly sworn-in President on posters raising money for the Union. Would love to see more writing and interesting information on authentication letters rather than slabbing (do not like for photos), assigning, numbering.

When evaluating a photo, a photo evaluator should ask, and answer to the extent possible, Why was this photo taken?

Best

[thecatspajamas]

It's a tough call, but it sounds like you need to leave out the LOA part of it and treat it like a museum curator might handle Joe Schmoe bringing an item of interest in for examination. No write-ups, just a "here's what I have, what is it?" service, with the final report being verbal rather than written. I'm not sure that would affect insurance/liability while the item is in your posession, but would definitely eliminate a lot of shady submissions intended to dupe you into giving a false thumbs-up for the purpose of re-selling, and for the most part would narrow your customers down to those who are genuinely interested in the piece itself and in hearing what you have to say on it rather than just looking for documentation for flipping it on eBay.

As far as a fee structure (since your time is valuable), maybe a flat submission fee plus some hourly rate if the amount of research required and the submitter's desire for further knowledge on the piece exceeds some predetermined time frame.

Not to lump you into the same category, but I'm picturing something more like the museum director, Mark Hall-Patton, who makes appearances on Pawn Stars (long beard, Amish-style hat). I don't know if he is paid for his appearances (surely), but he comes in, gives his analysis of the item and tells some of the history of it, and he's out. No evaluation of "value," no written documentation, just straight expert opinion. Whether that opinion satisfies the curious itch of the owner, or proves to him that he has mistakenly purchased a fake wouldn't change the evaluation.

Just some more thoughts to add to the mulling pot.

[Runscott]

I was able to hold that image and examine it (along with a bunch of other Lincoln images David was working with). They really got me to thinking about the need many people think they have for a 'Type' system, and reinforced my own opinion.

The above Lincoln is one of the coolest photos I've ever seen - period. I didn't bid on it because I couldn't rationalize having a photo of a 'damned Yankee' on my wall :), but if I ever did, it would probably be this one of Lincoln.

[Leon]

Great photo drc. Thanks for sharing.

[drc]

I still have to think it all over. Something for the future. Thank you for the input.

I understand collectors wanting a letter or whatever for a single photo. When I worked for an auction house recently, they did pay me by the hour and had me identify and write up descriptions of them-- including all the interesting stuff, like where the photographer came from etc. Might be different services for different folks/needs.

The pictured oversized photo is an 1890s platinum print made from the original 1860 negative. Platinum print is one of the highest forms of black and white photography and used platinum instead of of silver. It doesn't fade or deteriorate like many other photos, thus the grade A image. So it's essentially a highest quality reprint from the 1800s. Interestingly, the image is clearer and more detailed than an original version. And the the guy who made the print signed the back.

[Ladder7]

*snip* ...because I couldn't rationalize having a photo of a 'damned Yankee' on my wall :),

And that goes for Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio etc!