Press Photo and Wire Photo Questions - Newbie

[ChrisGalbreath]

Just FYI - the stickers on the back of the Historic Images / NEA photos are removable and will not damage the photo. This is for everything numbered NEA 2501 and higher. They are strictly used for inventory management purposes and were never intended to become a permanent part of the photo.

Hope this helps...

[thecatspajamas]

Mark, high five on the tag-team responses!

Chris, that is good to know. Any particular method that works best to remove them? Never mind. I just tried it myself. Simply got under one corner and it peeled right off. Thanks for the tip, as I probably never would have tried it otherwise!

[obcbeatle]

Originally Posted by ChrisGalbreath

Just FYI - the stickers on the back of the Historic Images / NEA photos are removable and will not damage the photo. This is for everything numbered NEA 2501 and higher. They are strictly used for inventory management purposes and were never intended to become a permanent part of the photo.

Hope this helps...

Thanks Chris! I just pulled one off with no problems!

[obcbeatle]

OK ... I guess I SHOULD get that book by Fogel/Yee et. al. as I am still kinda' confused about original Type I photographs (Lance if you still have a spare of the Fogel/Yee book you mentioned a few weeks ago you can PM me). My confusion is this. There was a 1938 Lefty Gomez press photo that I bought that I thought was an original Type I (unique ... only one produced at that time) photo until I saw an identical one last night that sold on eBay. The one I saw last night has the same brown paper provenance on the back and same # at the top of the brown paper, same date and ACME/NEA stamps, etc. The only difference is the stamps are in different places on the back than the photo I bought last week. So obviously this Type I photo was developed I assume off the same original negative multiple times by news services and distributed en masse (I'm pretty sure it's not a wire photo). Which now makes me wonder how one knows if a photo is rare in that it was not mass developed off an original negative i.e. a one of a kind Type I? Not sure that made sense. Still learning as you can tell :-) I guess my main questions are:

1) Is a Type I photo a one of a kind photo (no others exist)?
2) If not ... how do you determine if a Type I photo is rare i.e. there were not many of the Type I photo produced?

As always ... thanks for any enlightenment!