Looking for input from Photo Collectors

[drc]

The photographer does matter, but the photographer is rarely listed on a news photo so it usually doesn't matter. If the listed photographer is very famous, add a premium. If the photographer isn't listed or isn't very famous, don't worry about it.

The stamps and captions are important in that they help establish age and originality, especially for lay people. I prefer a good stamp or identifying tag on the back of a photo, whether it's from a newspaper or Vogue magazine. It's easier to resell a photo that has such identification on back, especially if the claim is it's by a famous photographer ... Many wirephotos have the caption on the front, so obviously in those instances an additional stamp or tag on back isn't required.

Image subject (ala Babe Ruth, famous particular game) is important along with quality of the image (clarity, artistry, uniqueness, even humor).

As far as condition goes, look at overall presentation value, in particular of the image. A wrinkle or crease to the white border pretty much means nothing, though a crease through the image would. Some honest wear that doesn't effect the image might not lower the value. With a vintage photo, grade Ex should be worth about the same as grade Near Mint. No one should care that an edge isn't Gem Mint. Realize that baseball card grades are applied to cards were thousands to tends of thousands of a card were made. With that 1909 Ty Cobb, there will be no more than a few in existence. Worry about overall presentation value, not razor sharpness of edges and corners.

Besides, you won't find Pre-WWI news photos that are Gem Mint. If you find one, its probably either a reprint or was trimmed. News photos were production items literally paper thin, and didn't last to today in Gem Mint condition. Dings and toning and wrinkles are the norm.

[thekingofclout]

As usual, not much more to add once Dr. C. weighs in on this subject

Best, Jimmy

[GrayGhost]

I enjoy photos, tho don't collect them per se. I find it interesting though, that there is so much "debate" and even at times, outright disagreement, over this. For me, isn't the most important thing that the photo is old, and one likes the image? All this Type One, Type two, and Type fifteen stuff is really mainly important for value, isn't it? yes, of course, a Type One original would have the most desirability, but this at times seems to be an issue that gets out of the "hobby" and more into the "business" of collecting, which honestly for a guy who wished he had the means to have a nice collection, is kind of sad in a way.

[Ladder7]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

All this Type One, Type two, and Type fifteen stuff is really mainly important for value, isn't it? yes, of course, a Type One original would have the most desirability, but this at times seems to be an issue that gets out of the "hobby" and more into the "business" of collecting

Scott, I agree about the value. But, more importantly... If you had identical images in front of you, of a scratched, creased, stained etc T1 and a T3. Most wouldn't even want to look at the modern copy.

With the real McCoys', the clarity is stunning. Inspite of all the wear.

Incidentally, I recommend folks just collect baseball cards. They're just better. Steve

[GrayGhost]

Well Steve, of course I don't want some ripped. scratched up photo ,and would love to have the absolute original. But, Ive seen some beautiful photos that weren't absolutely a "Type One" etc, and would gladly have them, for the sheer beauty of the image.

[drc]

Legendary has the unsold photos up for sale right now. I looked them over and there area some nice examples at good prices.

The use of stamps and tags is to help identify and date the photo. A tag sometimes serves this purpose and a stamp sometimes serves this purpose.

[perezfan]

David...

Where are they? I don't see them on ebay or Legendary's website. If on ebay, what is theseller name they use?

Thanks for the tip!
Mark

[perezfan]

Nevermind, David.... just saw the email from them!

Thanks for the heads-up....

[Exhibitman]

Since the newspaper business appears to be in freefall I'd guess we're going to see a lot more photo archives come up for sale.

As for the question w/r/t photographer, it depends on the era. If we're talking 19th century cabinets and CDVs I absolutely prefer an image from a well-known photographer over a comparable anonymous image.