[Johnphotoman]

It is not about type 1 photos, it is about how when I do talk to some people who say they are experts in the field say- they are Type 3, and right away the conversation stops. And I do not mean to say everyone over the years has said they are type 3.

I was just pointing out and this is for all those who have said they are Type 3, have said when you have text on the photo it becomes a Type 3 because they had to use a second negative to make the photo print, all because of the name on the photo.

I did miss speak on this, there are a hand full who have said they just do not know, but think they could go as type 1. And point out that the text on the photos does not automatically make them Type 3. I just was trying to say when I talked to some experts, they were not too happy to talk about them unless they themselves thought they were Type 1.

I believe what I have are team issue promotional photos, made from an original photo. Which used a different way to make a photo print than what so many experts have said.

It's about how people lump everything that looks alike into one category. And why we should also investigate on our own. Because sometimes even the experts are wrong. I went about the question all wrong. Thanks to all, John.