Quote:
Originally Posted by HRBAKER
You don't think that a "Type 1" designation is meant to have anything to do with value? Is it not implied that a photo that was printed within "two" years of the photo being taken is somehow more valuable than one printed on down the line.
Most collectors just want to know if the photo is old or of the era when the picture was taken, What kind of clarity does it have, what the subject and subject matter is, and is it a "real photo" , "press photo", "printed photo", "wire photo", "laser photo", "radio or sound photo", etc...
I certainly agree with this.
|
Of course it has to do with value and trying to mainstream the photo market, just like cards.
Just something else to try and manufacture another market for slabbing purposes.
Photography is just not that easy to define.
The David Rudd (Cycleback) school of thought is just more practical then the parameters that Yee/Fogel/Oser placed on photographs for the purposes of having them graded.
Yee/Fogel/Oser DID do fantastic work in the field of identifying various Press markings and stamps. For that alone it is worth the price of their book. What is lacking is their explanation of the two year rule when dealing with undated non-press photos. It's just not possible to be that exact.
As I said before, I rarely see them using their own designations with their own material unless it's an obvious Type I dated press photo. I just picked up the December 2009 Legendary photo catalog which touts PSA and this particular photo designation system throughout, and I don't see a single reference to "Type 1", "Type 2", "Type 3", "Type 4" in any of the actual descriptions. They use the term "Original Photo" and don't get much more specific then that. Even they aren't comfortable using it.
09-10-2010, 02:42 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode