New Photographic Collectible Coming Online

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Imago

This mockery sounds very familiar. It may be just what I want to hear.

I enjoy mocking those who deserve it.

Turning a little money into a lot of money doesn't mean I won't mock, it just gives me more opportunities to mock. You can make a billion dollars selling these things with their fancy little labels and slabs, I will still think they are a cause for mockery, just as I mock every successive owner of the Wagner I posted earlier. Worth millions? Evidently. Mock-able? Abso-f**king-lutely.

Just because you got an opinion seller to give you an opinion does not make that opinion valid to me.

Just because the two of you are attempting to push :

It's type 1
It's original
It's authentic
It's one of a kind

Down our throats does not mean I believe it is all (or any) of those things.

I believe there is a chance that you made it, which would then make it three of those things.

Hitting pause on my mocking for a moment, I have four individual questions for you, each very similar so I will pose them as one question :

Regarding the Alomar item : how do you, or the opinion seller, know that it is each of those things? Type 1. Original. Authentic. One of a kind.

Answer those questions and I will potentially stop my mocking of you and anybody else who thinks these things are, as you say, a "New Photographic Collectible".

Doug "but probably not" Goodman



PS - look at all the weird stuff that I collect, I am as mock-able as anybody on this site

[EddieP]

Educational purposes only ( I AM NOT TAKING A SIDE ON THIS TOPIC): people who collect photos of the photojournalism type put a premium on the ones with the caption underneath because it means the photo was “ Newsworthy” and it was used in publication. So if you enter a shop that sells only photos and NOT involved in sports memorobilia and if he is pricing a non-captioned photo higher than a captioned one, then you know he is ripping you off and you should be able to negotiate a lesser price. The opposite is true in sports memorobilia.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by EddieP

Educational purposes only ( I AM NOT TAKING A SIDE ON THIS TOPIC)

So you won't tell us if you are for or against mocking?

Insert smiley face here.

[EddieP]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

So you won't tell us if you are for or against mocking?

Insert smiley face here.

First of all, it’s nice to know PSA is recognizing this type of photo genre. Which is a plus considering they ( PSA) do not recognize photo/rotogravures.

However( and I’m not mocking the OP), he’ll really have an uphill battle in selling this. People who collect photos will pay a 1/100 of what a sports memorabilia collector would. Because of the aesthetics and skepticism, a sports memorabilia collector will not pay top dollar. And those who are willing to buy it , will only buy at very steep discounts.

Again, not mocking, to the OP, I wish you luck.

[SAllen2556]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I enjoy mocking those who deserve it.

Turning a little money into a lot of money doesn't mean I won't mock, it just gives me more opportunities to mock. You can make a billion dollars selling these things with their fancy little labels and slabs, I will still think they are a cause for mockery, just as I mock every successive owner of the Wagner I posted earlier. Worth millions? Evidently. Mock-able? Abso-f**king-lutely.

Just because you got an opinion seller to give you an opinion does not make that opinion valid to me.

Just because the two of you are attempting to push :

It's type 1
It's original
It's authentic
It's one of a kind

Down our throats does not mean I believe it is all (or any) of those things.

I believe there is a chance that you made it, which would then make it three of those things.

Hitting pause on my mocking for a moment, I have four individual questions for you, each very similar so I will pose them as one question :

Regarding the Alomar item : how do you, or the opinion seller, know that it is each of those things? Type 1. Original. Authentic. One of a kind.

Answer those questions and I will potentially stop my mocking of you and anybody else who thinks these things are, as you say, a "New Photographic Collectible".

Doug "but probably not" Goodman



PS - look at all the weird stuff that I collect, I am as mock-able as anybody on this site

I would agree that absolutely proving it's type 1, authentic, and one of a kind may be impossible. I suppose the best way would be to find the wire photo version of his original Alomar photo and match it up. I also think, like an autograph of, say, Buddy Bell, why forge it to begin with? It isn't worth $5, in my opinion, so what would be the point? And we all know practically any collectible can be faked.

If I understand correctly, what he's pushing is that he has the original wire photo before it was sent out. The one actually created by the specific newspaper that sent it out. I think, if it's a cool enough photo, there might be some added value there. Personally, I think the ones he showed are basically worthless. But if it's a Jordan photo? I think it might get more than the duplicated press photo would get, similar to having the original painting of one that was used to create a limited edition print run.

I have hundreds of press photos from the late 70's to the early 90's. I put them in 4 binders, displayed them at a garage sale and asked $1 apiece. I sold......two.

People collect barbed wire. To each his own.