[todeen]

Originally Posted by obcbeatle

Thank you, thank you. So perhaps it doesn't matter how many photos were produced off the original negative, just that for Type 1 not more than 2 years past, and for Type 2, 2+ years? So in my examples the Hedy Lamarr is likely a Type 1, and the 1928 Landis/Costello from 1946 likely a Type 2 (although that is almost 20 years past!). I also agree about the use/mis-use of the "Type" photo designations. It is more important to "buy the photo", just as it is more important to "buy the card" than go by a TPG grade, when collecting. Photos from the original negative clearly look better than photos not from the original negative. However, I'm not a photographer either so I don't know if copies of negatives are almost as clear as the originals. I suspect not. Thank you for the reply!

Here's another example of a Type 3. It's pretty easy to tell in hand that it's a copy of an original. It's very grainy, even Lombardi's face is not clear. And I believe the crumpled top left corner has no texture when you run your finger over it. But I believe it's a news archive photo, with a description of the back. I would need to dig it out again to look.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk