Henry's response is very informative and well written. With regard to the photo posted earlier of Bugs Bunny (that was bought from me) I will clarify one quick thing only because my name was brought up and where I differ a bit from the type system. I believe that a photographers intent should be factored into the image. I believe (and most photographers that I have spoken to agree with me) that if I take a photo of several Ansel Adams images and make a composite photo of them it should be treated differently than if Ansel Adams himself did it. In the former, it is not my work but in the latter, Adams used his own images to create a unique work of art. To each his own and I have no problem with the way PSA does it AT ALL, its just a personal preference I have with regard to gray area between classifying "Unique piece of work" and "Photo of a Photo".
I just wanted to clarify since one of my images was posted. It was not misidentified, that was created intentionally as a unique work of art to promote a Bugs Bunny film in the 1950's. It would absolutely get a "Type 3" from PSA, its just not how I view it... and its totally cool either way, just a personal preference.
Back to the discussion which is great!
Rhys
|