 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7
02-10-2010, 10:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Who came up with the arbitrary (2-3 years after the photo was first taken) rule to be a Type 1? I have some really nice Ruth images with 1923-24 stamps on the back and are they REALLY considered Type II because the original photo was taken by the photographer in 1920 and this one has a date stamp of 1923 on the back? It makes sense for Post WWII images, but in the infancy of News Service photographs right around WWI, this seems like a needlessly harsh rule. Just my 2 cents.
Rhys 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Jimmy Foxx 1933 Goudy GAI 3 VG | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 07-29-2008 09:07 PM |
| 1934 Tour of Japan Original Photo (Ruth, Gehrig, Mack, Foxx, Berg, etc) | Archive | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 1 | 01-09-2008 07:37 PM |
| 1937 Goudey Thum movie #12 Jimmy Foxx | Archive | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 09-13-2007 10:10 AM |
| Kashin: SGC 84 Chuck Klein, SGC 86 Jimmy Foxx | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 11-07-2005 10:56 AM |
| Need ID help, etc. with a J.H. Woods Imperial size cabinet photo | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 08-16-2003 02:56 PM |
Threaded Mode