Anyone win any photos in Legendary's Auction?

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by drc

There's nothing wrong with calling it a 1930s George Burke photo. You don't have to call it original or 1936 if you don't want to. You label photos one at a time and the key is to describe what a photograph is. Sometimes you can describe a photo with one word (ala "original") and other times it can take a paragraph to explain what's going on. Sometimes you don't know exactly when a photo was made and you don't say you do. As noted, news photos by their nature are intended to be timely and you can be more confident many were made right away. Studio photos can be more difficult, but they can often be dated to the period, which satisfies many Hollywood collectors. You can have a 1932 image of Greta Garbo where you can't prove the date but are confident the photo is from the 1930s due to the physical nature. And, actually, most movie studio photos and promos were timely as well, as they were usually tied to movie releases.

The PSA/DNA 2 year rule really is a concept. In my book I use the rule "Made soon after the image was shot." Does a Burke photo shot in 1932 and printed in 1937 count as "soon after"?

First and foremost, common sense must come into play. As for myself, I simply stay away, far away. from blank back photos, period.

Regarding any piece of memorabilia, if you're spending your hard-earned money on photos, bats, autographs, or whatever it is you collect, and the authenticity cannot be determined by the hobby's top experts, and you still pull the trigger, then you just might not be the sharpest tool in the shed.

Photo collectors are fortunate that we now have TWO major companies that authenticate photographs, as just a few years ago we had none! I mean really, we have some of the best experts in the country in Henry Yee, Dr David Cycleback, and Marshall Fogel. Why won't these auction houses use them?!

I just wish Legendary and Lelands (because they have the giant photo inventories) would utilize their services. I cannot understand why they don't, unless they would prefer to skate by with vague descriptions aimed at inexperienced buyers.

This only keeps the photo sector of the hobby from growing by the leaps and bounds that it should, with all the great major finds that have surfaced in the last few years.

Maybe they don't want to hear the bad news that some potential big ticket photos can't be determined if it's a TYPE I or II and rather than lose a huge sale, just sell it raw (with a "no returns" policy of course).

At least Legendary deserves props for including scans of the back of the photos. By now, even a casual photo buyer knows how important the information on the back of the photo is in determining the value of the photo.

Come on Josh & Hef... let's have some more transparency here. I want to buy more of your photos, but not if I can't see the whole package.

Would you buy a expensive car with only looking at the outside? You can't open the door and get inside and no way can you take it for a test drive. How can you do business like that.

In closing, I'm gonna drop a line from one of my favorite movies that I think is appropriate here, Glengarry GlenRoss... "A man doesn't step on the lot lest he wants to buy." We're dying to give you our money...are you man enough to take it? Are you Josh? Are you Doug?

Sincerely and respectfully, Jimmy