[Archive]

Posted By: Josh Evans

I am sorry that you found this description misleading, I will try to explain. The Matty photo was printed in 1920 off of the original negative which was taken circa 1905.

The quality of this image tells me it is first generation. We do not like to say whether any of our our images are first generation, second generation, and so on. Sometimes that is difficult to specifically state unless you have seen the original negative or a superior print better than the pone you are looking at. Also, I do not think it is necessaryily germane. It is the quality that counts not some pigeon holing of photo terms. I like what savvy photo buyer Corey Shanus does whenever he wants to bid on something. He asks me, “Josh how is the contrast?” I am embarrassed to confess here that the first time he asked me that I had to ask him what that meant.

Although this is not the norm, I have seen many first generation pieces (blurry) that look far worse than a great second generation print. With apologies to Messrs. Fogel and Yee (and I truly respect their work) I do not believe in the whole Type One, Type Two thing because it is too confining and simplistic. Many first generation prints simply suck due to bad photographers, and there are also potential condition issues. How many badly yellowed and faded prints have you seen especially with early material such as albumen photos? Plus, who cares about "Types" if you had say an amazing three foot high “second generation” Dana boxing photo of Jim Jeffries that reads “Great White Hope” with a lynching cartoon that was not drawn into the negative?

As for when something was printed being a factor of value that is also up for conjecture. 15 years after the fact is really nothing in this case. I think the auction price of over $9,000 proves that theory out. Look at any fine arts photography auctions and you will see images printed 50 years later selling for thousands of dollars because they were done by the right people (the photographer or his studio) and with the correct photo process, and from the right stuff (the original negative).

Joshua Leland Evans
Chairman
Lelands.com