Posted By:
runscottCollectors of "mounted baseball-related photographs" tend to call them either cdv's or cabinets (it's mounted and bigger than a cdv). Sometimes they are called "over-sized" cabinets or "large" cabinets, and in all cases the exact dimensions are either known by the collector if it is from a well-known series, or the dimensions are available upon request if not described in the auction.
I don't see a problem with Mastro calling the 1873 mounted photo a "cabinet" since they also gave the dimensions. I think that part of the reasoning behind this is that PSA doesn't slab photos, but does slab cards - calling this photo a "cabinet" makes it more legit for it to be in plastic prison. BTW, cabinets come in various sizes (as we define "cabinet"), while T3's only come in one size. If you received a T3 that was 2 x 3", it would be a reprint; however, if you received some small 1952 Bowman football cards, and some large ones, that would be okay, as long as they were one of the two originally produced sizes. Cabinets; however, according to baseball photo collector terminology, could be various sizes.
I realize that technically the descriptors we use are incorrect, and that "mounted photograph" purists probably get hernias when they see us failing to adapt their terminology (or slipping away from it), but the "cdv/cabinet" thing works well for us. If they were ESPN they could force us to use it (like RBI instead of RBIs)...I still say "RBI's".
But after having said all of this, I also think that everyone really appreciates your efforts to educate us on mounted photograph terminology - I even tried to use some of your designations on my web-site, but realized after I had completed the job that I screwed up in several instances (I tried to get fancy by using "imperial", and mis-applied it).