NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-26-2017, 07:52 AM
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE's Avatar
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE EYECOLLECTVINTAGE is offline
Stephen
Stephen Abb.ondandolo
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 2,367
Default Dating photo stock

I was wondering if anyone here had any tips in regards to spotting fake photographs from 50's-60's. When looking at photo stock, is there anything in particular that should or shouldn't be seen under a UV light?

I am trying to figure out if a few items I have are genuine, however they are blank backed and tricky.

Thanks in advance.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:26 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,083
Default

It partly depends on the photo and the lab that it was made in.

Snapshots back then often had the date stamped on the back.
8x10s usually came from a more pro type photo lab, and often won't have any markings. But the paper was the same.

For a beginner, I'd suggest going to some antique places and picking up some old photos. Pics of random people and/or places are pretty common, and usually $1 and under. The more involved photos are easier to figure out the age of. If the pic is of a family standing in front of what's probably the new family car, it was almost always taken during that year or the one prior.
Another good clue is womens fashions. Especially late 40's through maybe the late 60's those can get you within a year or two.

The paper for snapshots was usually the same as for 8x10s, so once you've got a handle on what a 40's photo paper is like, an 8x10 will be much easier.

You can also look at how clear the image is. While it varies with the source material - 35mm won't usually be quite as nice as a medium format and the large format negatives mad for very nice photos- and the skill of the photographer, an image that isn't crisp is often the product of a copied negative made by placing a negative over another piece of film stock. the thickness of the plastic usually affects the "focus" causing the second generation negative to be less crisp than the original. (Modern laser techniques are MUCH harder to spot)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:02 AM
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE's Avatar
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE EYECOLLECTVINTAGE is offline
Stephen
Stephen Abb.ondandolo
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 2,367
Default

Steve,

Thanks for the reply.

I have a good grasp of the stock, however not all of the stock from the period is exactly the same (50's in particular), as I have noticed some stock is smoother (not kodak smooth, but like a flatter finish). Is there something that can be seen under a UV light as far as fibers or other things that should/should nto be on stock from that period?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-27-2017, 12:33 PM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,466
Default

The back of photopaper before 1968 should be fibery. If it's smooth and plasticy on back like a 1999 Kodak snapshot, it's after. The fronts can be (and usually will be) glossy. In 1968 Kodak started making resin-coated paper, which means the paper back and front is very smooth and plasticy, though not all post 1968 photopaper is resid coated.

The back of the photopaper generally gets darker the older it is. 1930s is usually darker than 1950s-60s than 1990s. It's not dramatic, but if you directly compare to a 1990s or 2000s photo (say a family snapshot) to a 1950s-60s photo, the 1990s or 200s photo will be much brighter/whiter. This is part because the paper naturally tones with age and part because in recent decades they started bleaching photo paper which made it bright white.

I did a comparison with a whole mass of photos 1910s-modern, and while it wasn't foolproof, the tonal changes were consistent. Even a 1988 versus a 2005 photo was usually different tonally. For testing tone, you should do direct comparison with other photos. While a 1910s or 20s photo will be obviously well toned at first glance, a lot of more moder photos don't look toned or off-white until you directly compare them (literally one overlapping the other) with a modern photo. This is also just one test, and you should relay on one test-- but I've found it very helpful.

The chemicals that make photoper fluoresce brightly under UV were introduced circa 1955. Most photopaper after will flourese under blacklight, but not all.

When you get more modern photos, it is harder to date the paper-- which is nice when it has stamping or tags.

Last edited by drcy; 11-27-2017 at 12:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-27-2017, 02:11 PM
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE's Avatar
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE EYECOLLECTVINTAGE is offline
Stephen
Stephen Abb.ondandolo
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy View Post
The back of photopaper before 1968 should be fibery. If it's smooth and plasticy on back like a 1999 Kodak snapshot, it's after. The fronts can be (and usually will be) glossy. In 1968 Kodak started making resin-coated paper, which means the paper back and front is very smooth and plasticy, though not all post 1968 photopaper is resid coated.

The back of the photopaper generally gets darker the older it is. 1930s is usually darker than 1950s-60s than 1990s. It's not dramatic, but if you directly compare to a 1990s or 2000s photo (say a family snapshot) to a 1950s-60s photo, the 1990s or 200s photo will be much brighter/whiter. This is part because the paper naturally tones with age and part because in recent decades they started bleaching photo paper which made it bright white.

I did a comparison with a whole mass of photos 1910s-modern, and while it wasn't foolproof, the tonal changes were consistent. Even a 1988 versus a 2005 photo was usually different tonally. For testing tone, you should do direct comparison with other photos. While a 1910s or 20s photo will be obviously well toned at first glance, a lot of more moder photos don't look toned or off-white until you directly compare them (literally one overlapping the other) with a modern photo. This is also just one test, and you should relay on one test-- but I've found it very helpful.

The chemicals that make photoper fluoresce brightly under UV were introduced circa 1955. Most photopaper after will flourese under blacklight, but not all.

When you get more modern photos, it is harder to date the paper-- which is nice when it has stamping or tags.

Thank you!

So if this is a post 55 photo it will flourese under black light?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:07 PM
Michael B Michael B is offline
Mîçhæ£ ßöw£ß¥
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,828
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EYECOLLECTVINTAGE View Post
Thank you!

So if this is a post 55 photo it will flourese under black light?
As David said in the next to last sentence "Most after will fluoresce..."

Having a very large archive of photos I would agree with all that David said especially about the aging of paper. There is also a feel to older papers. Many times you can hold it in your hands and feel the age by the texture and thickness. Heavy fiber papers used by professional studios for portraits are fairly consistent but even those have a certain feel. Another consideration is size of the image. 8x10 did not become common until the 1940's. Prior that smaller sizes were used more - 3x4, 4x5, 5x7 and 6x8. I have quite a few photos of the first three listed smaller sizes from circa 1903 to 1912. This relates to photos produced by professionals - Bain, Thompson, Bushnell etc. not snapshots.
__________________
'Integrity is what you do when no one is looking'

"The man who can keep a secret may be wise, but he is not half as wise as the man with no secrets to keep”
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-28-2017, 01:27 PM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,466
Default

The blacklight would identify most later reprints. But, as there are some later photos that won't fluoresce, the non-fluorescence would be "consistent with" it being old.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-28-2017, 07:29 PM
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE's Avatar
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE EYECOLLECTVINTAGE is offline
Stephen
Stephen Abb.ondandolo
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 2,367
Default

Understood Yú da best
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-29-2017, 09:58 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,083
Default

Yeah, DRCY really knows this stuff.

I'm just someone who's looked through .....I don't even know how many boxes of old photos at shops and flea markets. I have a pretty good feel for the age of something, but it's usually harder to explain.

I will say that the stuff mentioned here about how the paper reacts to a blacklight applies to photo paper very well, but only in a general sense for other papers. Most of the modern acid free papers won't react, and neither will some modern low quality cardstocks. BUT, there are older papers that do react, back into the 1880's and perhaps before (1880's is the oldest I own) They're not exactly common, but they are out there.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-29-2017, 11:02 AM
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE's Avatar
EYECOLLECTVINTAGE EYECOLLECTVINTAGE is offline
Stephen
Stephen Abb.ondandolo
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 2,367
Default

Very informative guys. I do have a feel for the stock. It's like rough grainy feel, however have come across some less fibery backs from the same period but can identify it from stamps and smell.

It is all practice and experience like you guys said.

I appreciate everything!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help with dating a photo jburl Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 2 05-02-2015 08:53 PM
Help dating photo Jason19th Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 3 05-31-2014 01:00 PM
need help dating this photo JoeyF1981 Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 6 02-27-2014 05:37 PM
Help Dating Photo - Falstaff Team Photo - Nashville thecatspajamas Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 4 09-03-2011 11:14 PM
Help with dating yet another old photo Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 8 09-26-2006 12:36 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:10 AM.


ebay GSB