Johnny Evers photo type question

[milkit1]

I picked up this beautiful Bain shot 1909 Johnny Evers photo and was wanting to get thoughts on wether it is a type 1 or type 2. I've seen a wider version of the same shot that has the Bain writing on the top. When I zoom in on that one it appears a little lighter than this one. However this one feels like other type 1s from the period.
I've read that Sy Seidman retook a bunch of photos in the 60s but I've read that those have his name on back. This does not. The back mentions Culvers but has a lot of tape on it covering up much of the original back.
Thanks for the assistance :)
413339

413340

413341

[milkit1]

Looking for opinions, thanks

[bgar3]

Sean, I was a photo collector before type 1 terminology etc and I can tell you that I saw many original Bains with a similar back and stamping. I no longer have any or I would post them. It looks like a very nice image and does not appear to me to be a more modern copy, certainly not from the 60’s. For what it is worth.

[milkit1]

Sean, I was a photo collector before type 1 terminology etc and I can tell you that I saw many original Bains with a similar back and stamping. I no longer have any or I would post them. It looks like a very nice image and does not appear to me to be a more modern copy, certainly not from the 60’s. For what it is worth.
Thanks for the feedback on it. Yeah it certainly has the feel of an original. I'd love to see one of the reshoot ones from the 60s that Seidman did as a comparison. I may have to send this one in (I dont usually get these authenticated). It came from a collection that was mostly sold at the big Sporting News auction in 98 but its lacking the sticker so I cant says for sure.

[drcy]

If you have photos from the period and it's consistant, I assume you're okay. The paper should be pretty thin

That the image is cropped a different since, including smaller, isn't an issue. Photographers cropped images from the negative in various ways.

[milkit1]

If you have photos from the period and it's consistant, I assume you're okay. The paper should be pretty thin

That the image is cropped a different since, including smaller, isn't an issue. Photographers cropped images from the negative in various ways.

Thanks David. I attached here a scan of the other more full one for comparison. My is pretty thin and worn with the same consistancy of other type 1s I have. There are thin strips glued to the back that I assume probably cover earlier identifications.

413968

[milkit1]

A little bigger version of the one I dont have.

413969