Type I photos... why are their multiples?

[Lordstan]

The definition of a Type 1 photograph according to the Yee/Fogel system, which PSA has adopted, is a photo printed from the original negative within 2 years of the photo being taken.
Given that definition, it is certainly possible, even probable, that more than one copy was made, for various reasons. The reality is likely not that many were made and some of those were destroyed/damaged/cut up for composites or editorial choices. This is why they bring premiums over Types 2, 3, or 4.

[Robbie]

The longer you are active in the photo market (and the more photos you see or handle), the more you will learn about which images are unique, scarce, rare, plentiful, etc. as original vintage prints made from the original negative.

[Jersey City Giants]

I have really gotten into collecting these. Far, far fewer examples of a type I photo than a card. A type 1 can be 1 of 1 or 1 of 50. Just depends how popular the shot was at the time. A shot can be type 1 as long as it was developed within ROUGHLY 2 year from being taken. I have seen a bit of wiggle room here.

[docpatlv]

Originally Posted by Jersey City Giants

I have really gotten into collecting these. Far, far fewer examples of a type I photo than a card. A type 1 can be 1 of 1 or 1 of 50. Just depends how popular the shot was at the time. A shot can be type 1 as long as it was developed within ROUGHLY 2 year from being taken. I have seen a bit of wiggle room here.

Always wondered, how can you tell if a print was made from the negative 2 years after the photo was taken...versus 3, 4 or 5 years later? Does it need to have a date stamped on back?

[T_Hamilton]

Originally Posted by docpatlv

Always wondered, how can you tell if a print was made from the negative 2 years after the photo was taken...versus 3, 4 or 5 years later? Does it need to have a date stamped on back?

Great information so far, that is another question I would LOVE answered.

[Jersey City Giants]

Stamps, paper type, writing on back. Many times PSA will not offer an opinion when they just don't know.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Jersey City Giants

Many times PSA will not offer an opinion when they just don't know.

With the obvious joke being "but many times they will (offer an opinion)"

Doug "still beating that dead horse" Goodman

Or maybe "as long as that dead horse asks for a beating..."

[drcy]

Originally Posted by T_Hamilton

Great information so far, that is another question I would LOVE answered.

2 years is an arbitrary number, though, as noted, date stamps, tags or circumstance says the photo was made within 2 years.

News photos were by definition for news and news reporting, so, barring stock or reusable images (ala standard portrait of the President or image of the Capitol Building), they were made very soon after the image was made.

Original movie press or still photos were made for when the movie came out, not 2 or 3 years after. That's a case of determining by circumstance.

But for some photos, such as George Burke photos, you can't know. From the studio stamp you can be sure a Burke photo is vintage, ala 1930s, but won't know if that 1933 image or Babe Ruth was made in 1933 or 1939.

Vintage Burke photos are still highly collectible and collected, and that they fall outside the type system shows the limits and scope of the type system not the photos. The type system was designed with the usually easily datable news photos in mind. PSA has to bend their rules to call a Burke photo a Type I-- and I think they often do. They bend their rules for other photos, and are often making fair judgment calls.

But there's no reason the cut off has to specifically be 2 years. That was just PSA's arbitrary pick for their 'type system,' and no doubt there are PSA 1-ing photos that they aren't certain fall within that window. Thus, they don't always use it as a cut-and-dry detriment because they can't. However, since 2 years is arbitrary anyway (why can't it be 3 yeas or 2-1/2 or 1 or 'soon after'?) that's doesn't have to be treated as a big issue. Vintage and from the original negative is what you should be looking for.

Also note that PSA's system doesn't say a Type I is automatically better and more value than a Type 2 or whatever. PSA itself specifically makes that point. It's a system for cataloging photos-- though there are some obvious trends value-wise. They also say that their system doesn't apply to some photos.

One needs only point out that N172 Old Judges are not Type 1 images (they're photos of photos), and can be quite valuable. Though N172s are also trading cards, and that it's own collecting genre. You can say that N172s fall into two colleting areas, and any 1800s baseball photo will have value just from being from the1800s.

[T_Hamilton]

This is all just so fascinating to me... its like the light to my shelter in place darkness.

Any other good threads or websites that can be shared would be appreciated.

Taylor