Vintage photographs
 

I am a clean slate. I have never bought one or know anyone that collects them, but I find them very interesting and have been wanting to start.

I have always found vintage photographs interesting, but there are so many of them I have never known where to start. I am looking for a good resource to find information about vintage photos and how to discern the different types (type 1 - type4).

In particular how can someone tell when the photo was made?

What characteristics are PSA/DNA looking at to make their judgement?

Are there any good books and/or websites that are great resources to educate myself on this large spectrum of collecting?

I recommend starting with David's website: http://www.cycleback.com/

I haven't been impressed with the PSA/DNA photograph-slabbing experiment - it's just led to more trimming of vintage photos, and attempts by auction houses to use terminology that they clearly don't have a good grip on - I've seen several photos incorrectly id'd as type 1's (one questionable one is going to sell tonight for thousands of $$$'s). On the flip side, buyers rely on the 'type' designations now and a lot of non-labeled bargains can be found.

I think we were better off when we were provided good clear scans of both the backs and fronts of untrimmed photos, and made decisions based on those, as opposed to a semi-meaningless photo slab.

I second the recommendation for David's site, and also HIGHLY recommend you buy this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Baseb...1830101&sr=1-1

All of the PSA business aside, this publication gives a very in-depth look at the world of collecting baseball photography, as well as the histories of various news services, photographers, and the medium itself.

In terms of collecting, I haven't much advice, only to get your hands on stuff that excites you - stuff that you love and will enjoy. I'm sure fellow board members (I'm looking at you Jimmy and Ben!) will gladly chime in.

Graig

The book is a MUST for vintage photo collecting. I have been buying and selling vintage photos for years and years and I use the book daily as a reference on the press stampings.

Rhys

mainly
 

One thing I have really enjoyed lately is collecting the photos used to make our cards. Some can be very inexpensive while others, not so much. David Rudd Cycleback's site is a great place to start, when gaining photo info, as well as the book Graig recommended. best regards

Why, do the two overlap? Sorry, not getting the comment. I don't think you can really ignore photo slabbing in today's environment, and it's easy for a new collector, especially one with deep pockets, to go down that road blindly. We see it with autograph LOA's, and we see it with card slabs.

Your innocent question can spark a powder keg of opinions, so let me give a brief primer.
I am a fish at the lower end of the pool when it comes to vintage photography, but these are my experiences.

Vintage Photos are very cool to collect.
Prior to getting too involved with expensive pictures, make sure you read both David Cycleback's website and The Yee/Fogel book.
Both offer outstanding information that will educate you about all different aspects of collecting vintage phots.

Henry Yee and Marshall Fogel co wrote the book, noted in Graig's post, which first proposed the Type classification system for photography. Currently, they are the two gentlemen who do the authenticating for PSA's service.
David Cycleback has a long history and credits regarding photgraphy and art identicfication and classification. As of the last time I looked, he was the authenticator for Beckett. They offer the same grading and evaluation services for pictures as PSA, using the same "Type" system.

On this board you will find differences in opinion on the merit and utility of the "Type" classification system. I think most of us realize that the system isn't perfect, but a large number of us, including myself feel that it at least offers some semblance of organization/classification as compared to what was done previously. I am not going to go into the long debate on the merits/flaws as you can search for "type" and see all the previous threads detailing everyone's opinion.

As an additional way to learn would be to do a search for "Show your" on the board. There have been many posts like "Show your Babe Ruth items" and others. These were all started by Kingofclout, who happens to be one of the biggest vintage photo collectors on the board. These threads are great sources of discussions and showing off of many of the tremendous photos in everyone's collections on the board.

For a vintage photo collector, this place is fantastic. You will see some incredible pictures on the board.

Hope that helps,
Mark

Also to answer Scott's question:
I agree with you about the slabbing. I personally don't care for it. I do find the "type" system to be helpful. In my mind, the good or bad value of the system is separate that the value of the slabbing.

Well said, Mark!!

Graig

Agreed, very good summary Mark.

I might even suggest reading the outside sources (David's site and Yee/Fogel's book) first before digging into the previous (rather heated) debates of the Type classification system on these boards. They should result in less confusion for you if you have a good knowledge base up front.

...and well said, Lance!!

Graig

I agree that it's helpful - especially to those who haven't acquired the skills to differentiate between different types of photos. I wasn't participating in forums when this system originated, but David and I discussed it regularly. I personally did not like the idea of a grading company being involved with photographs - to me, that would lead to slabbing, which would encourage alteration and more trimming.

I was also kind of stunned when the fox was led into the henhouse, but I guess that henhouse already had a few foxes in it.

Ok a couple of things.
First Jimmy's correct id is thekingofclout. If you search for his id, i'm sure you'll find most of the threads with vintage photos.

Searching for "show your" didn't actually work that well when I tried it, so here are a couple of examples of the threads I'm talking about.

Mantle stuff
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=show

Babe stuff
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=show

Lou stuff
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=show

Advertising pieces
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=show

Also you may want to check out the monthly pick up threads. Everything is posted there, so you get to see a lot of stuff.

Lastly, Andy be careful what you wish for..
I came to this board as a small Lou Gehrig collector who also is working on a signed 1934 Goudey set. 6-8months later, the majority of my budget seems to be going into vintage photographs. Be very careful!

The stamping on the back of the photos tells you a lot about the date, as the different news companies existed at different times. Also, some have the date stamped on it.

The Portrait of Baseball has good listing of the stamps, so it would be a good guide for news photos.

Scott,

Have you seen a lot of intentional trimming of photos prior to being slabbed? I'm not questioning your observation, just really wondering what the point would be since, to my knowledge, PSA does not actually grade the photo being slabbed but rather deems it "authentic" or not and assigns a Type, neither of which would be affected (or improved) by trimming. I could see this being a concern once number grades are being assigned to photos (not doubt it's coming sooner or later), but until then, I would think that most of the photo-chopping was done by editors over the years cropping photos for publication. Am I being naive in thinking that?

Photos are not cards. Trimming is common. Photos are collected mostly for the aesthetic presentation of their subject matter. Of course you want stuff that is in presentable condition, but I know of no serious photo collector that collects a photo because it has sharp corners.

The act of Number grading photos would be a horrible failure IMO.

I agree. I don't like the 1-10 grading system for photos. There's nothing deficient with editorially used photos that have rough or whatever edges. Collectors trimming photos to get a PSA 10 is a horrible thing. Altering something for the sole reason of $$ is terrible, and the 1-10 grading system gives reason for collectors to do that.

Honestly, no serious photo enthusiast gives a flying f*ck if that photo grades a 10. The 10 stuff is for 1985 Topps Tiffany collectors.

You aren't being naive - most probably was done when the photos were 'younger'.

But yes, I saw plenty of intentional trimming. 8-10 years ago we were posting 'before and after' examples here on the board, but there wasn't much interest in the subject at the time - photo collecting was not as big as it is now. Yes, some were cropped long ago, but such items show age over the years - moreso than cards, because the photos were often handled roughly, and in many cases, weren't collectibles. I had a Newsboy cabinet of Ward that was stamped, mailed repeatedly, and still held up very well - but it was just considered a photo of a baseball player.

The reason is always money - Trimming brought more money to the sellers. If you cut off the rough edges, it looks like it's in better shape. Photos were later slabbed because some collectors seem to want everything behind plastic that can possibly be put there, and slabbers were ready to take money for that as well. Trimmed photos look better in the slabs than do those with rough edges, so, yes - I think slabbing led to even more trimming. It was all a simple progression in my opinion.

The photo-slabbers definitely considered 'grading' photos, but it was too tough to determine if a photo had been altered. Imagine strip-card grading with even more variables - it would have been a nightmare. By simply slabbing as 'authentic' (with types added), the pre-slab owners are free to do whatever they need in order to make their photos 'prettier'.

It's sad to find photos with pristine edges, then you look at the back and see half of an original Conlon signature. Or, the original newspaper clipping of the photo is glued to the back, and it's a larger image than the photo on the front. This is the sort of thing I look for when purchasing more expensive photos. If I don't want to see the rough edges, I'll matt it out myself.

I don't want you guys to get me wrong, I am in no way advocating a numeric grading system for photos. I just hope to goodness that the various grading companies at least get the same reaction of disgust expressed here if/when they feel that out as an option.

I could be off in this too, but I get the feeling that there are more newcomers to the photo collecting corner of the hobby these days than ever before. Whether it makes sense or not, oft times collectors will bring "baggage" with them when migrating from one area of collecting to another, which may be as simple as mis-applying terminology, or in my thinking here, a proclivity for encapsulating everything in their collection with a number grade on the flip. Maybe I'm being overly-cautious in my thinking and cooler minds will prevail, but as much as I dislike the idea, it wouldn't surprise me to see it at least tried.

Edited to add: Scott, thanks for the added info/experience. Much more well-written than my own concurrent musings.

Thanks Lance - I enjoy your photo musings, as well as most others written here. I realize I'm walking a fine line of acceptance whenever I criticize encapsulation and grading, but that's life. I was collecting photos long before PSA got their mitts into our hobby, so I think I have that right.

Yes, there are plenty of newcomers, but there are still plenty of great photos at reasonable prices. We didn't use to have many people to discuss vintage photos with - I'd rather have more collectors and fewer photos than vice versa. Much more fun, and besides - we're all just renting this stuff.

Hi Andy

I'm a rookie photo collector myself and can only echo what other members have said in this thread. Check out David's website, buy the book and read past threads. The knowledge you will gain will be a valuable tool for collecting vintage photos.

Don't rely on "dumb luck" like I did. The first vintage photo I bought was of Larry Doyle taken by Louis Van Oeyen. After some research, I realized that I should have bought a few more photos the dealer had. When I went back to the dealer the next day someone had beat me to the punch. All the other Van Oeyen photos were gone. A simple case of the dealer and I didn't know what he had!

Even if you're like me and can't afford a Conlon or Horner photo, there are still some really cool vintage photos out there to buy/collect.

Hope this helps you


Jantz

George Burke's are affordable and top notch in quality. They're just more plentiful which lowers the price. Amongst other things he shot the photos for the 1933 Goudeys-- and he photographed all the days' stars Ruth to DiMaggio to Ted Williams. The backs of his are stamped Geo. Burke with his his 807 Belmont Ave Chicago address.

Collectors can also go into cabinet cards, panoramas, tintypes and other great stuff.

My 2 ¢
 

After collecting and selling mainly vintage sports publications for 25 years, I started collecting photos over the last 2 years. There were a few reasons for this migration. 1) Space...thousands of wire photos fit into a bunch of binders on a book shelf. 2) Price...good bargains can still be had. Even with high end auctions, you still can sneak in and get good value. 3) Uniqueness...The majority of the images are unique. There are no price guides and your own eye can place a value on what you like. This can be helpful with #2 price. However, this also be tricky upon resale. The image that you loved might not appeal to everyone else. 4) Availability... with all of the large archives begin sold or digitized, the sheer volume of what is on the market is amazing. 5) Built in provenance... I particularly love photos that have both the stamp and paper caption. With the exception of some modern reprints (which are easy to identify), older photos with both of these elements can be dated, identified and certainly do not need some third party grading system.

And like many before...DRC's website and the Yee/Fogel book are essential.

Jeff

I believe the address is 847 Belmont, but yes, I definitely agree that Burke's photos are very affordabe, and cover pretty much every player (even the 1-gamers) to have played in the majors in the 1930's-40's. Many of his images have appeared over and over on cards and elsewhere, from Goudey, Play Ball and National Chicle in the 1930's even up to more modern-day issues from TCMA, Pacific and the like. Fun stuff to find a photo that was used for a pre-war card AND that is actually affordable for a beginning collector!

I agree with all the comments posted so far - they will make a big difference in your ability to accurately judge the authenticity of vintage photos as well as enhance your appreciation of this field of collecting.

I would add one additional thing that has proven invaluable to me in becoming familiar with a critical tool for evaluating the age and time window of publication for vintage photos.

Henry Yee_Auctions on Ebay (about 4 times a year) posts hundreds of photos with accurate descriptions and ,more importantly, clear photos of the front and back. Being exposed to this great diversity of different types of stamps and paper captions on the back of photos will serve you well. For example, subtle differences in stamps of the major news services often will allow you to pinpoint a photo to a specific year, for example a United Press photo from 1953 vs 1955.

Whereas, all of these suggestions that have been posted will provide a scaffolding of information - and information is the most important commodity for collecting- your primary goal should be to enjoy the photos.

Good luck.