Type II photos?

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by drc

I've never been a fan of the type I, type II, etc classification, but do think Yee's book is good. Even if one plans to never adopt or use the PSA type system, the book has a lot of practical information. The type I et al is just the book's idiosyncratic way of classifying photo types.

The first publication I ever purchased regarding vintage photos was David's "News Service Photographs" which I found to be very helpful in both understanding the general process as well as introducing specific types of photos, paper captions, stampings, etc. His subsequent online (and paper back) offerings have continued to inform.

The second publication I got was the Fogel, Oser and Yee Guide which expanded the topics originally covered by David and provided even more examples of stampings, photographic images, etc.

Although some may not have fully embraced the classification of four Types of photographs introduced in this guide (there are clearly shortcomings in certain instances), I have found it to be the best attempt yet to define photographic origin (and potential value) amongst the myriad of diverse photos that comprise the current marketplace.

One of the joys that I get from collecting (aside from the items themselves) is the education and historical significance associated with each piece that I acquire. Sometimes obtaining this information requires a considerable amount of time and effort (which I embrace) but when a well-researched guide can provide a significant body of information on specific topics I can only view it as a plus for collectors.

One of the essential features in collecting anything is a cogent base of related information and for me the above mentioned guides and publications have certainly enhanced my abilities to more fully understand, appreciate and evaluate vintage photos.

Craig

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

The first publication I ever purchased regarding vintage photos was David's "News Service Photographs" which I found to be very helpful in both understanding the general process as well as introducing specific types of photos, paper captions, stampings, etc. His subsequent online (and paper back) offerings have continued to inform.

The second publication I got was the Fogel, Oser and Yee Guide which expanded the topics originally covered by David and provided even more examples of stampings, photographic images, etc.

Although some may not have fully embraced the classification of four Types of photographs introduced in this guide (there are clearly shortcomings in certain instances), I have found it to be the best attempt yet to define photographic origin (and potential value) amongst the myriad of diverse photos that comprise the current marketplace.

One of the joys that I get from collecting (aside from the items themselves) is the education and historical significance associated with each piece that I acquire. Sometimes obtaining this information requires a considerable amount of time and effort (which I embrace) but when a well-researched guide can provide a significant body of information on specific topics I can only view it as a plus for collectors.

One of the essential features in collecting anything is a cogent base of related information and for me the above mentioned guides and publications have certainly enhanced my abilities to more fully understand, appreciate and evaluate vintage photos.

Craig

Craig, my education on photos also began with David's books, followed by asking LOTS of questions - I was quite a pest. I followed this up by grabbing inexpensive photos regularly, over a 10+ year period. Nothing beats personally examining many examples of photos, then asking pertinent questions. I have generally purchased photos based on whether or not they would be worth that much as a piece of art, hanging on my wall. With that in mind, the 'Type' classification system didn't mean much. I still generally go for famous photographers (with stamps or signatures), so pricing them is not difficult. Outside of Bain, most such photos are Type I's, so again, it just doesn't matter.

I used to also be able to pick up Type I's of famous players, but with non-famous-photographer stamps. Such photos were cheap ten years ago, but now the 'Type I' thing has caused them to go up in price. For instance, a nice original Babe Ruth (or any famous player for that matter), that was not taken by Thompson, Conlon, Frances Burke, Van Oeyen, etc., could be had for nothing. Not so anymore. Wish I had saved all of mine.

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Craig, my education on photos also began with David's books, followed by asking LOTS of questions - I was quite a pest. I followed this up by grabbing inexpensive photos regularly, over a 10+ year period. Nothing beats personally examining many examples of photos, then asking pertinent questions. I have generally purchased photos based on whether or not they would be worth that much as a piece of art, hanging on my wall. With that in mind, the 'Type' classification system didn't mean much. I still generally go for famous photographers (with stamps or signatures), so pricing them is not difficult. Outside of Bain, most such photos are Type I's, so again, it just doesn't matter.

I used to also be able to pick up Type I's of famous players, but with non-famous-photographer stamps. Such photos were cheap ten years ago, but now the 'Type I' thing has caused them to go up in price. For instance, a nice original Babe Ruth (or any famous player for that matter), that was not taken by Thompson, Conlon, Frances Burke, Van Oeyen, etc., could be had for nothing. Not so anymore. Wish I had saved all of mine.

Scott, I think we are more or less on the same page and I completely understand your position with regard to Type classifications. I'm certain that from the perspective of many dealers, I too was a "pest" trying to understand as much as I could about individual photos - often to the point that some of them, in an attempt to get rid of me and service other customers, would finally say "I think so and so has some nice photos in that booth across the room". And I could not agree more about holding a photo in your hand - the feel, texture, smell, condition of the surface emulsion and all the info on the back -- just an invaluable experience.

I do remember early on, and before I truly understood their significance, that I did (luckily) gravitate towards images that were very clear and backs that had a brown paper caption and/or a date stamp. In addition, compared to yourself and several others on this forum, I probably also suffered to some degree by the narrow focus of my collecting interests. Rather than the broad array of subject matter (and photographers) that you have mentioned I only focused on Mantle - and in more recent years only on vintage, first generation photos of the Mick from 1949-1951

Nonetheless, I continue to find the search and occasional find of such images a rewarding experience. Even in this rather limited area I have been fortunate to acquire some fantastic images of Mickey taken by some pretty good post-war photographers, including: Wm. Greene, George Dorill, Mastro, E. Sisto, Anthony Bernato, Emmons, Scharfman, Olen, Wingfield, Osvaldo Salas, Bill Jacobellis, Barney Stein, Wingfield and Ossie Sweet.

The gist of all my posting on this forum is certainly not to criticize or diminish in any way others perspectives or views but rather to try to share some of my own limited experiences in this area of the hobby that I am so passionate about.

The ability to view so many of the photos posted from other established collectors and hear their comments and views is the primary reason that I joined this forum and why I enjoy it so much.

Craig

[thecatspajamas]

On the subject of publications, are there others that you guys have found helpful in relation to photos? I keep touting Fogel/Yee's book primarily because of the catalog of back stamp styles which I have found particularly useful, but am wondering if there may be others I am overlooking.

I did recently picked up David's "Guide To Sports Photographs" (is that the same one you referred to, Craig?) and "Forensic Light: A Beginner's Guide" but haven't had opportunity to dig into them yet.

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

On the subject of publications, are there others that you guys have found helpful in relation to photos? I keep touting Fogel/Yee's book primarily because of the catalog of back stamp styles which I have found particularly useful, but am wondering if there may be others I am overlooking.

I did recently picked up David's "Guide To Sports Photographs" (is that the same one you referred to, Craig?) and "Forensic Light: A Beginner's Guide" but haven't had opportunity to dig into them yet.

Hi Lance,

I believe that the "Guide to Sports Photographs" is a later and more extensive treatment on the subject compared to the earlier pamphlet that I mentioned by David. That and the Fogel et al. guides are the two best that I have found although I am sure that many other more specific books exist on the newspaper printing and wirephoto process as well as more detailed surveys on the photographic image etc.

I too would like to hear from others on the forum if any other useful guides exist relating to the evaluation of baseball vintage photos.

Craig

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

On the subject of publications, are there others that you guys have found helpful in relation to photos? I keep touting Fogel/Yee's book primarily because of the catalog of back stamp styles which I have found particularly useful, but am wondering if there may be others I am overlooking.

I did recently picked up David's "Guide To Sports Photographs" (is that the same one you referred to, Craig?) and "Forensic Light: A Beginner's Guide" but haven't had opportunity to dig into them yet.

All I ever needed was David's series of books, accompanied by exchanges with him on the old forums beginning ten or so years ago, then conversations over the years and my own observations. I'm certain that Yee has produced something quite useful to those who need that sort of stuff, as I know many people who have the book and they speak very highly of it. I'm told that t's primary usefulness to those who are new to the hobby is it's backstamp identification. From conversations I've had with photo collectors on the board recently, I'm sure that's all true, as they've brought up nuances of backstamps from Yee's book that I was unaware of, and would never have bothered memorizing or writing down. Somehow I've survived without it, but perhaps I'm just blissfully unaware. I do have one Ruth photo that is slabbed, but will trim off the labeling now that I've decided to make it 'permanent'.

In any case, Henry and I had many conversations back in his early days. While I disagreed with his early methods, he was pleasant and generally willing to talk.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

On the subject of publications, are there others that you guys have found helpful in relation to photos? I keep touting Fogel/Yee's book primarily because of the catalog of back stamp styles which I have found particularly useful, but am wondering if there may be others I am overlooking.

I did recently picked up David's "Guide To Sports Photographs" (is that the same one you referred to, Craig?) and "Forensic Light: A Beginner's Guide" but haven't had opportunity to dig into them yet.

Lance,

Fogel/Yee is by far the best resource that is out there IMO so you definitely started in the right place. I also believe that is pre-dates all the other books mentioned. It was/is the groundbreaking book in baseball photography.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Lance,

Fogel/Yee is by far the best resource that is out there IMO so you definitely started in the right place. I also believe that is pre-dates all the other books mentioned. It was/is the groundbreaking book in baseball photography.

That's incorrect - David (Cycleback) was publishing books about photography while Henry was still cutting his ..... teeth

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

That's incorrect - David (Cycleback) was publishing books about photography while Henry was still cutting his ..... teeth

It is clear that you have a personal isssue with Henry. This, coupled with the fact you have not even opened his book makes your opinion on this matter a wee bit jaded.. but ok