[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

I would like to point out that a number of the topics that I regularly harp on ('if it's real it's a photoengraving,' 'look for paper fibers,' 'old photos will likely have silvering' etc) are not just technicalities but have to do with the authenticity of an item. Julie's specific question about the expensive photograph she was bidding on was, whether it was really an original from the 1882 or was it a reprint, circa 1905. Most photographs aren't like baseball cards, where you can refer to a SCD or Beckett to see if when they were made. So the mostly technical facts that Kevin and I discussed related to how to judge whether the photo was actually from the 19th century. In this case, he took out a microscope and looked for paper fibers in the photographic image. What does viewable paper fibers say? In combination with the other qualities of the photo, this almost assures that Julie's photograph was original. This is because that on most 20th century baseball photographs, made with a different process that covers the image in gelatin, the paper fibers can't be seen under a microscope.

I know that most collectors, dealers, auction houses (Yes, even MastroNet) and professional graders ignore my regular harping on these types of technicalities. But this is their problem not mine, as I am confident that any major auction house or grader who doesn't know, for examples, the difference between a gelatin-silver and an albumen photograph, or how to identify a photoengraving, will someday, if they haven't already, sold or grade a fake.