Conlon Type 2

[drcy]

I rewrote my post before I read your response. Neither the UPI or the John Rogers are type Is, in parts because they were printed years later and because Charles Conlon didn't make them . I was just saying that negative to digital print in and of itself doesn't disqualify something from being original. Just in my opinion. It won't kill me if someone disagrees. If someone says an original digital print can only be when the image was photographed digitally, I understand what they are saying.

For me, deciding whether a work of art is original depends on what the artist envisioned the final work of art to be-- a digital print, house, painting, sculpture, collage-- and taking into consideration that there are steps to reach that goal. It would be silly to expect Frank Lloyd Wright to make an original, unique house without intermediary steps-- sketches, models, etc etc. He might have made a mini version of the house in his back yard. Artworks don't happen, start to finish, in the blink of the an eye.

And, for the record and under normal circumstances, I would consider a paper photograph that is scanned and printed out digitally to be a reprint.

As with art and 'rookie card,' the definition can be in the eye of the beholder. Someone out there would probably claim the Mona Lisa isn't original because there are sketches of the same image by Da Vinci from months earlier.

[JoeyF1981]

Based on the type system do you think theres that much of a significant difference in value between a type 1 and type 2?

[drcy]

Yes. Type ones are originals. All other qualities equivalent, the original is always worth more.

I've had similar made later UPI photos of Pre-War baseball and thought they were good quality. Nothing wrong with collecting them and nothing wrong with your purchase, in part because they are official and limited-made photos by UPI with their stamp on back. But clearly they aren't $$ valued as the vintage original printed by Conlon.

My initial post was intended to be strictly about original negative to digital print conversion. I didn't even once offer my opinion that the PSA type system is for the weak and ineffectual.

[horzverti]

Originally Posted by drcy

For me, deciding whether a work of art is original depends on what the artist envisioned the final work of art to be-- a digital print, house, painting, sculpture, collage-- and taking into consideration that there are steps to reach that goal. It would be silly to expect Frank Lloyd Wright to make an original, unique house without intermediary steps-- sketches, models, etc etc. He might have made a mini version of the house in his back yard. Artworks don't happen, start to finish, in the blink of the an eye.

Amen! (with a capital A)...and I obviously agree with you David.