Legendary Auctions - Photos

[Marckus99]

Did everyone believe that the majority of photos in the last auction were actually type 1 - vintage?

Just Curious,

Mark
mrios@hotmail.com

[drc]

I can't say for everyone, but, yes, I did.

[ethicsprof]

dsvid is certainly one of the foremost experts in this field and I wholeheartedly agree with him.

best,
barry

[drc]

I don't want to dig myself into a hole, especially if the initial question is leading, as my impression was just my impression and it was based just on browsing the catalog. For example, I have no knowledge of was exactly in those bulk lots of 5,000, and I'm sure the auction contained wirephotos and later generation images. But a perfunctory survey of some single photo lots showed period stamps and/or tags, and I believe all the Thompson and Conlon photos were specifically labeled as original in the titles.

[jacksons]

I think that's correct - all Conlons and Thompsons were in fact reviewed and labeled as Type 1s by the PSA team.

Outside of those lots, there were a few that you could tell from date stampings that were also Type 1s, which Legendary had not asked PSA to review.

The majority of the rest I was told were in fact not Type 1s - printed at a later date.

But I really don't know specifics.

[drc]

Without going back to the catalog to confirm, I recall there was a large category of UPI photos with pre-war baseball images. As UPI was formed in the 1950s, those would be later generation.

//// Added to say I just checked a lot description in the UPI category and it clearly indicated the photo was from years after the image was shot. There's nothing errant with auctioning a later generation photo if you say it's later generation.