[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

It's the responsibility of the seller to give an indication of a photo's age,
so that the seller didn't say anything about age is not an excuse for him.

My experience as a photo buyer is that if the seller doesn't specifically mention
that it's 'vintage,' 'original' or similar, it usually isn't. If a photo is
original, the seller will be sure to say so ... But, as mentioned, the seller is obligated
to say if a '1901' photo was made in modern times, just as a seller of a T206
is obligated to say the card is a modern reprint if it is. If a seller puts up
'T206 Ty Cobb,' the general working assumption is that he is offering the original
card. If it is a 1999 version, he has to clarify that it is the 1999
version, or at least that it is not the original. You can apply this to the photo.
If the photo is from 2001, he has to indicate it's modern age, at least
making it clear that it is a reprint from years after the image was shot.

If the seller grumbles about you wishing to return the photo, tell him to start
correctly indicating the ages of his photos and it won't be a problem for him
in the future.

I've looked at the seller's photos. Almost anyone honest offering these types of photos
would give some indication of age at auction-- because anyone buying or selling
photos knows the significance of a photo's age. Even if the honest seller was a newbie
he'd have some comments about age ("I'm no expert, and it's hard for me to kow the age...").
I do not beleive that it is accident or oversight that this seller never
gives any indication of age for the photo he sells.