help with Walter Johnson photo?

[Brian]

Thanks, guys, that is pretty much what I thought. Like grading, I don't get too caught up in classification systems, but I just wondered if there were any other clues for judging photos and how they are printed...
Happy with the photo either way since I only paid a bit more than 20 bucks for it.
Cheers,
Brian

[drc]

I would guess it was not made from the original negative, but you can't tell for certan. Originals can be a bit burry and grainy, especially distance and action shots. Less likely on a closeup-- unless it was a zoom in closeup from a team photo or such. Many times, it is obvious the original negative was not use and many times it's obvious it was. But sometimes you can't be sure.

As it was printed later (but is still old), I don't think it's a big deal. Clearly from the dating it's not a vintage original, so whether or not it was printed from the original negative is secondary issue. If it was stamp dated 1924 then you'd be more concerned if the image was first generation.

At resale, most buyers base their bids on the date of the physical photo versus the date of the image and the quality of the image.