Vintage photographs

[bn2cardz]

I am a clean slate. I have never bought one or know anyone that collects them, but I find them very interesting and have been wanting to start.

I have always found vintage photographs interesting, but there are so many of them I have never known where to start. I am looking for a good resource to find information about vintage photos and how to discern the different types (type 1 - type4).

In particular how can someone tell when the photo was made?

What characteristics are PSA/DNA looking at to make their judgement?

Are there any good books and/or websites that are great resources to educate myself on this large spectrum of collecting?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

I am a clean slate. I have never bought one or know anyone that collects them, but I find them very interesting and have been wanting to start.

I have always found vintage photographs interesting, but there are so many of them I have never known where to start. I am looking for a good resource to find information about vintage photos and how to discern the different types (type 1 - type4).

In particular how can someone tell when the photo was made?

What characteristics are PSA/DNA looking at to make their judgement?

Are there any good books and/or websites that are great resources to educate myself on this large spectrum of collecting?

I recommend starting with David's website: http://www.cycleback.com/

I haven't been impressed with the PSA/DNA photograph-slabbing experiment - it's just led to more trimming of vintage photos, and attempts by auction houses to use terminology that they clearly don't have a good grip on - I've seen several photos incorrectly id'd as type 1's (one questionable one is going to sell tonight for thousands of $$$'s). On the flip side, buyers rely on the 'type' designations now and a lot of non-labeled bargains can be found.

I think we were better off when we were provided good clear scans of both the backs and fronts of untrimmed photos, and made decisions based on those, as opposed to a semi-meaningless photo slab.

[GKreindler]

I second the recommendation for David's site, and also HIGHLY recommend you buy this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Baseb...1830101&sr=1-1

All of the PSA business aside, this publication gives a very in-depth look at the world of collecting baseball photography, as well as the histories of various news services, photographers, and the medium itself.

In terms of collecting, I haven't much advice, only to get your hands on stuff that excites you - stuff that you love and will enjoy. I'm sure fellow board members (I'm looking at you Jimmy and Ben!) will gladly chime in.

Graig

[prewarsports]

The book is a MUST for vintage photo collecting. I have been buying and selling vintage photos for years and years and I use the book daily as a reference on the press stampings.

Rhys

[Leon]

One thing I have really enjoyed lately is collecting the photos used to make our cards. Some can be very inexpensive while others, not so much. David Rudd Cycleback's site is a great place to start, when gaining photo info, as well as the book Graig recommended. best regards

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by GKreindler

All of the PSA business aside, this publication gives a very in-depth look at the world of collecting baseball photography...

Graig

Why, do the two overlap? Sorry, not getting the comment. I don't think you can really ignore photo slabbing in today's environment, and it's easy for a new collector, especially one with deep pockets, to go down that road blindly. We see it with autograph LOA's, and we see it with card slabs.

[Lordstan]

Your innocent question can spark a powder keg of opinions, so let me give a brief primer.
I am a fish at the lower end of the pool when it comes to vintage photography, but these are my experiences.

Vintage Photos are very cool to collect.
Prior to getting too involved with expensive pictures, make sure you read both David Cycleback's website and The Yee/Fogel book.
Both offer outstanding information that will educate you about all different aspects of collecting vintage phots.

Henry Yee and Marshall Fogel co wrote the book, noted in Graig's post, which first proposed the Type classification system for photography. Currently, they are the two gentlemen who do the authenticating for PSA's service.
David Cycleback has a long history and credits regarding photgraphy and art identicfication and classification. As of the last time I looked, he was the authenticator for Beckett. They offer the same grading and evaluation services for pictures as PSA, using the same "Type" system.

On this board you will find differences in opinion on the merit and utility of the "Type" classification system. I think most of us realize that the system isn't perfect, but a large number of us, including myself feel that it at least offers some semblance of organization/classification as compared to what was done previously. I am not going to go into the long debate on the merits/flaws as you can search for "type" and see all the previous threads detailing everyone's opinion.

As an additional way to learn would be to do a search for "Show your" on the board. There have been many posts like "Show your Babe Ruth items" and others. These were all started by Kingofclout, who happens to be one of the biggest vintage photo collectors on the board. These threads are great sources of discussions and showing off of many of the tremendous photos in everyone's collections on the board.

For a vintage photo collector, this place is fantastic. You will see some incredible pictures on the board.

Hope that helps,
Mark

Also to answer Scott's question:
I agree with you about the slabbing. I personally don't care for it. I do find the "type" system to be helpful. In my mind, the good or bad value of the system is separate that the value of the slabbing.

[GKreindler]

Well said, Mark!!

Graig

[thecatspajamas]

Agreed, very good summary Mark.

I might even suggest reading the outside sources (David's site and Yee/Fogel's book) first before digging into the previous (rather heated) debates of the Type classification system on these boards. They should result in less confusion for you if you have a good knowledge base up front.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

Also to answer Scott's question:
I agree with you about the slabbing. I personally don't care for it. I do find the "type" system to be helpful. In my mind, the good or bad value of the system is separate that the value of the slabbing.

I agree that it's helpful - especially to those who haven't acquired the skills to differentiate between different types of photos. I wasn't participating in forums when this system originated, but David and I discussed it regularly. I personally did not like the idea of a grading company being involved with photographs - to me, that would lead to slabbing, which would encourage alteration and more trimming.

I was also kind of stunned when the fox was led into the henhouse, but I guess that henhouse already had a few foxes in it.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I agree that it's helpful - especially to those who haven't acquired the skills to differentiate between different types of photos. I wasn't participating in forums when this system originated, but David and I discussed it regularly. I personally did not like the idea of a grading company being involved with photographs - to me, that would lead to slabbing, which would encourage alteration and more trimming.

I was also kind of stunned when the fox was led into the henhouse, but I guess that henhouse already had a few foxes in it.

Scott,

Have you seen a lot of intentional trimming of photos prior to being slabbed? I'm not questioning your observation, just really wondering what the point would be since, to my knowledge, PSA does not actually grade the photo being slabbed but rather deems it "authentic" or not and assigns a Type, neither of which would be affected (or improved) by trimming. I could see this being a concern once number grades are being assigned to photos (not doubt it's coming sooner or later), but until then, I would think that most of the photo-chopping was done by editors over the years cropping photos for publication. Am I being naive in thinking that?