 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13
01-03-2011, 03:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I am completely on board with the differentiation between generations of photographs. However, I have a very hard time believing that anyone can pin down the date of issue of an original photo with sufficient clarity to say it was issued within two years of the photo being taken. Sure, if the thing is signed and dated by the subject I guess you could set a date, or if there is a stamp on the back listing when it was received or run in the newspaper, but otherwise is just speculation that I don't think justifies a substantial pricing differential, which is really all we are talking about when it comes to the distinction.
As an aside, one of the things I like about collecting postcards that are postally used is that the dating is pretty solid on them.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Vintage Type I Press Photos - 1936 Yankees, Carl Hubbell & Red Ruffing, 1937 NL AS's | D. Bergin | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 0 | 10-01-2009 12:00 AM |
| Vintage Type I Press Photos - 1936 Yankees, Carl Hubbell, Babe Didrikson & Jimmy Foxx | D. Bergin | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 0 | 09-30-2009 11:39 PM |
| E107 - Type I vs. Type II | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 32 | 07-17-2005 12:17 AM |
| Type Card Collection | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 07-15-2005 10:01 PM |
| Type collecting criteria | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 10 | 01-29-2003 10:29 AM |
Threaded Mode