Renowned Photo Auctioneer Henry Yee to Partner with Rogers Photo Archive

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by prewarsports

I will say this really quick as I was not going to post again but I will just to specify one thing. People are entitled to their own opinions and I respect that. Had I not been insulted publicly I would have said nothing AT ALL.

FIRST, the "Type" system is copyrighted. If I could have gotten a written permission to freely use it, I would have just used it and made extra comments about each photo where I felt it needed clarification. This was not possible so thats that!

SECOND, My system (which took years to develop after looking at over 1 million photos) is very comprehensive and brings something new to the hobby and I will tell you why. Should photos that are 2 years old be worth more than those made 5 years after? YES! Problem is, unless you have a photo with a paper caption and/or a date stamp (that is not FAKED) you only have the paper stock and a news service stamp to go off of. Back stamps were used for a number of years, sometimes as much as 10-15 years in some cases. Right now if ALL you have is a company stamp on the back that was used during the right year and nothing else, its a type 1. What is happening in the hobby, and I have seen it hundreds upon hundreds of times, is that people who have a photo that would otherwise be a "Type 2" because it is say 5 years after the original but the company stamp is the same one as would have been used to make it a "Type 1" are ripping off paper labels and destroying damning evidence while keeping good evidence to pass off a photo as a "type 1" and NOBODY (not me, not Henry NOBODY) can tell.


Example, lets say you have a 1939 Lou Gehrig Luckiest man Speech Photo. The "Acme" or "UP" label is the same one as used in 1939, but the back has a date stamp of 1944 and a paper caption that talks about "Five years ago on this date Gehrig makes his famous speech". With the label and date intact its a "Type 2" and worth maybe 100-200 bucks. Destroy the label and get rid of the date somehow and you now have a "Type 1" that is worth 1000+ bucks. In a hobby where fraud is the norm, THIS IS HAPPENING and it is happening A LOT!

My system is designed to do 2 things and otherwise it is the same as the "Type" system. Deter fraud, and more accurately (in my opinion) distinguish between "Type 2-4" photos. Thats it. End of Story. It is not "Revolutionary" it just is a step (in my opinion) to clarifying a few loopholes that I discovered as a COLLECTOR of photography and a step to try (futile as it may be) to clean up some of the fraud in the industry that I love.

In a perfect world the type system is great. Problem is, its not a perfect World and the collectibles arena is filled with dirty people.






Last thing. I applaud Marshall Fogel and Henry Yee for pioneering this industry. I am walking in their footsteps and I am aware of that and respect and admire both men more than any of you will probably ever know. If not for them and their book, I am not where I am today and I cant thank them enough. I AM NOT saying my system is "better" just that I believe it is more comprehensive and deters fraud, thats it. I am not insulting anyone, I took a system that they created because of a need in the hobby and tweaked it just a tiny bit.

I wish Henry all the luck in the World with his new venture and I hope it brings him happiness in his life, he deserves it as he is a great guy and someone I consider to be a good friend. I would never say anything bad about him and I know that he personally would say the same about me. There is plenty of room for more than one seller of vintage photos and you will NEVER see me take shots at him or anything he does for the betterment of my own company and I will do my best (as I have already spoken to him about this over the phone personally) to stagger my auctions away from him to not compete and I will never take a shot at him, PSA/DNA or anything. I would encourage anyone and everyone to do as much business with HIM as possible.



If anyone wishes to discuss anything with me and my "vastly inferior, fly by night, needless, archaic, system" please e mail me and I will give you my personal number to call and discuss it.

Rhys

Rhys, How is the type 2-4 any different? You do the same thing using more steps. All the type system photos are dated so your vintage 1-3 does nothing but add more classifications. That goes for type 3s too...dated. So the wire vintage vs the other is also creating another classification. Am i wrong here? please help me understand. Also, it is not more comprehensive to make a range of a type 1 bigger at all. The example in the article was good but here are actually countless better.
Also..what does this even mean? "In a perfect world the type system is great. Problem is, its not a perfect World and the collectibles arena is filled with dirty people." Are you saying yours is a perfect system in a non perfect world?? I mean.. The grading in condition is promoting fraud more than anything. You have a buck weaver as a 5/5. What stops someone from trimming a full size image down to get this high grade? Also, what stops someone from tearing off a caption six or seven years later to get your type 1 classification. Answer.. Nothing. Fraud exists in cards, autos, game used, photos ect. I see nothing here that makes it any less.
When a system is copied(with a few things changed to avoid copyright)and calls itself more comprehensive when it is not.. It is a problem imo. As you said, we are all entitled to our opinion but man... I never saw Henry or PSA go on your marketing thread and say anything about copying or classless. I mean.. You compare the type system within each definition of the one on your site. You basically copied it and then called yours more thorough and comprehensive with the only real change being the 2 to 5 years. Then when this release copes out...you get upset and throw classless around? Come on Rhys ..I'm just saying. You seem like a good guy from the convos we have had and very knowledgeable and I wish you the best. However, I do not agree that your system is at all tweaked in a positive way or done in a positive manner. As you know, that didn't stop me from bidding and have wished you the best in your auction from day 1. I, will also open an invitation if you or anyone wants to talk more about this subject. Unfortunately, this thread went off the track at post 2. Good luck to Henry and Rodgers. Henry will add a lot to that group. I am always excited to see fresh images introduced the hobby. Ps: sorry for run-ons..spelling errors ect.. I am tired and this iPad sucks. Peace

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Unfortunately, this thread went off the track at post 2. Good luck to Henry and Rodgers. Henry will add a lot to that group. I am always excited to see fresh images introduced the hobby. Ps: sorry for run-ons..spelling errors ect.. I am tired and this iPad sucks. Peace

Ben, it got off track at Post 1. That news release is blatantly unprofessional. I'm surprised Henry allowed it, based on all the praise he has received on this board.

You know my thoughts regarding the type system, PSA's photo slabbing, and supposed 'industry standards' with regard to describing photos, etc. As we discussed, most of use who were knowledgeable vintage photo collectors prior to this system's creation, didn't need it in order to collect 'safely', and many of us (me, at least) thought/think it flawed and felt that it introduced fraud opportunities that didn't exist prior to its inception, but you and I disagree on that, and that's fine. But it's here and all the newer collectors expect photos to have a 'Type' designation. Describing something as 'Original' isn't enough for them, and they might even figure you are hiding something if you don't say 'Type x'. Still, I don't personally use it. Rhys, on the other hand, has explained why he feels that something had to be done. I disagree with him on that point, but he's running a new, large photo auction, and he's thinking about this from a different perspective.

One more point regarding 'type' designations: just as with the autograph TPAs situation, photo type systems were not created for me or for any other knowledgeable collector, but I agree with you that they ARE beneficial for their intended market - I just think that most of the people in that market are better off collecting something else. If you quit using some of your brainpower because you are letting PSA do your thinking for you, then you are asking for trouble. I will also admit that if I were ever to view a hyee auction, and was looking for original photos, it would make things easier for me to be able to search for 'Type I', then focus more by looking for alterations, correctness of stamping, image quality - basically, anything I would have looked for BEFORE the type system was created. But it would make things quicker. Of course, if he put 'original' in the subject line, for me personally, it would accomplish the same thing.

I will use the same method when viewing RMY auction items. Taking as an example John Roger's 1932-35 'Ruth Shot' photo that he uses to attack Rhys' credibility, SO WHAT? As a knowledgeable collector, I will look at the photo and USE MY BRAIN to make my own decisions. If I'm buying stuff based totally on a 'designator' (either PSA's or Rhys'), and spending thousands of dollars, then I am an idiot. John has lost his mind if he really expects people to make decisions that way. At the very least, he's insulting the intelligence of his market.

[David R]

Shouldn't this thread be over on the memorabilia side?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by David R

Shouldn't this thread be over on the memorabilia side?

No

[nolemmings]

Ben, it got off track at Post 1. That news release is blatantly unprofessional. I'm surprised Henry allowed it, based on all the praise he has received on this board.

Exactly. As noted, utterly classless.

[HRBAKER]

I agree the systems have flaws but to argue my system is better because I can guess closer to the real date is really not a strong point.

My thoughts as well.
Well stated.

At the end of the day these systems whether applied to cards or autographs or photographs are not so much about accuracy but liquidity IMO.