Post Your Type 1 / Type 2 / Wire Photos / Etc

[Brownie33]

Picked up a really cool pre rookie Yaz photo that just came into today’s mail.

[mikecala98]

My first ever PSA submission was a success! Sure condition isn’t the best but I got this from a local thrift shop for $15!

[mikecala98]

More from my PSA sub!!

[ichieh]

Love this cabinet portrait recently sold at RMY

[Chris Counts]

Originally Posted by ichieh

Love this cabinet portrait recently sold at RMY

I like how an artist transformed Christy Mathewson's suit into a baseball jersey.

[ichieh]

can’t tell from the picture, but from the baseball card, Matty was redhaired?

[ichieh]

also seen here

[ichieh]

and here.

[mikecala98]

Freshly slabbed!!

[Lucas00]

Ed and John o'brien shown here in their 1953 rookie season with some young twin fans.

[clydepepper]

My Cousin Whitlow telling Joe where to go:

1941 WS Photo - Whitlow v. JoeD a.jpg
1941 WS Photo - Whitlow v. JoeD Back.jpg

....and Lefty O'Doul pitching:

1920s Lefty ODoul Type 1 Photo A.jpg
1920s Lefty ODoul Type 1 Photo B.jpg

[Swadewade51]

I don't normally go for wire photos but this was a very special case: Larry Doby signed by Bill Veeck of Cleveland and integrating the American League. Super happy to add another MLB pioneer in their Negro Leagues uniform to my collection. img094.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Dewey]

Not really a wire photo guy either, but just picked up this shot of Jackie's last MLB hit. 10th inning walk-off hit Game 6 1956 World Series.

[Bicem]

Just looked at your 42 collection, wow! Love it.

[Dewey]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Just looked at your 42 collection, wow! Love it.

Thank you kindly, Jeff.

[metsandweezer]

[Lucas00]

Lloyd Waner shown in 1942

[Lucas00]

I just added these two in the same week (crazy luck what can I say)
Reds 1949 Bowman and 1955 Robert Gould Card images alongside my cards of the two.

The Bowman is my first mainstream type 1 card image.

Bowman image by famous cardinals photographer George Dorrill and the Gould image of course done by the legend himself, Jacobellis.
This brings me to 4 type 1 original card images of Red.

[Swadewade51]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

I just added these two in the same week (crazy luck what can I say)
Reds 1949 Bowman and 1955 Robert Gould Card images alongside my cards of the two.

The Bowman is my first mainstream type 1 card image.

Bowman image by famous cardinals photographer George Dorrill and the Gould image of course done by the legend himself, Jacobellis.
This brings me to 4 type 1 original card images of Red.

When you hinted about what you were picking up I new it had to be Red, no idea it'd be such a big one. Congrats Lucas! You're always digging up gold!

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Swadewade51

When you hinted about what you were picking up I new it had to be Red, no idea it'd be such a big one. Congrats Lucas! You're always digging up gold!

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Cheers Wade!! Your collection is always a treat to the eyes.

[Dewey]

Great pickups, Lucas. Photos used for cards are so fun!

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Dewey

Great pickups, Lucas. Photos used for cards are so fun!

Much appreciated 😊! Couldn't agree more

[todeen]

Type 3 or Type 4 Ernie Lombardi. Associated Press stamp on back.

20240416_081139.jpg
20240416_081509.jpg

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by todeen

Type 3 or Type 4 Ernie Lombardi. Associated Press stamp on back.

Attachment 618323
Attachment 618324

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

This is most certainly a type 1. That AP stamp and the caption remnants. I would say it definitely is.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

This is most certainly a type 1. That AP stamp and the caption remnants. I would say it definitely is.

if you held it in your hand you'd be able to see that it is a photo of a photo. On the front borders it appears like their is white tape. but if you run your finger over them it has no texture. additionally, the photo is kind of hazy, not extremely clear. If it is a type 1, the camera was out of focus.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by todeen

if you held it in your hand you'd be able to see that it is a photo of a photo. On the front borders it appears like their is white tape. but if you run your finger over them it has no texture. additionally, the photo is kind of hazy, not extremely clear. If it is a type 1, the camera was out of focus.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

That is strange, not something I've seen before.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

That is strange, not something I've seen before.

here is what I'm talking about for the tape. I've seen this taping before on other photos. But this is not tape on my photo.

20240416_150003.jpg

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Swadewade51]

Here are a couple cool period wirephotos. First from Killer being signed to his bonus baby contract. Then Larry Doby in his Newark Eagles uniform from when he signed with Cleveland and integrated the American League. It's hard enough getting any of the earlier integraters in their negro league uniforms in an original print. This one is a very happy medium.img096.jpgimg094.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Swadewade51

Here are a couple cool period wirephotos. First from Killer being signed to his bonus baby contract. Then Larry Doby in his Newark Eagles uniform from when he signed with Cleveland and integrated the American League. It's hard enough getting any of the earlier integraters in their negro league uniforms in an original print. This one is a very happy medium.Attachment 618907Attachment 618908

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

That Doby is awesome! I've been looking for a Doby from his time in the Negro Leagues and his time in the military for a long time with no success. I would very happily take a wire photo at this point for sure.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Swadewade51

Here are a couple cool period wirephotos. First from Killer being signed to his bonus baby contract.

My hero as a young Nats fan. I seem to recall another teenager picked up by the Nationals playing semi-pro in Idaho about 50 years earlier...

[Swadewade51]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

My hero as a young Nats fan. I seem to recall another teenager picked up by the Nationals playing semi-pro in Idaho about 50 years earlier...

A player that's also part of my PC since we are both WaJos and he's the GOAT.

Just recieved and scanned this one.img121.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Flamethrower]

Originally Posted by Swadewade51

A player that's also part of my PC since we are both WaJos and he's the GOAT.

Just recieved and scanned this one.Attachment 619029

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

What a great pic!

[Big Red Machine]

I picked up a 1975 Cincinnati Reds original 3x5 photo set. Many of these were used for the SSPC set.

[Lordstan]

Big thanks to Jim Chapman for an excellent deal on this photo of Babe and Lou.


Sent from my SM-F946U using Tapatalk

[Swadewade51]

Just realized I posted the Doby twice. For penance here is a great action shot of Miñoso safe at home on a wild pitch.img070.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Brownie33]

Latest RMY pick up. A cool Mantle type 1 from 1966.

[Lucas00]

Schoolboy Rowe Type 1 Before the 1934 Series. Very Paul Thompson-esque.

[Snapolit1]

Couldn't resist buying this incredibly goofy, majestic and beautiful photo. Dodger spring training 1946. Sliding drills. Gene Hermanski, Les Berge and Gene Mauch with Chuck Dressen. Looks more like ballet than baseball. Even the shadows are cool.

[Big Red Machine]

I recently had these original rookie photos graded of Jim Rice and Carlton Fisk.

[obcbeatle]

One of the 1954 Giants WS heroes. Pitch hitter deluxe!

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Couldn't resist buying this incredibly goofy, majestic and beautiful photo. Dodger spring training 1946. Sliding drills. Gene Hermanski, Les Berge and Gene Mauch with Chuck Dressen. Looks more like ballet than baseball. Even the shadows are cool.

Awesome image. Aside from the cool subject matter, I love that Dressen is pictured wearing the Dodgers Satin Uniform of the era. Very unusual to see any pictures of Dodger players/coaches sporting the rare Satins. Great stuff.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Awesome image. Aside from the cool subject matter, I love that Dressen is pictured wearing the Dodgers Satin Uniform of the era. Very unusual to see any pictures of Dodger players/coaches sporting the rare Satins. Great stuff.

Here's a similar era photo, less all-around beauty, same satin uniform, plus Branch Rickey

[Swadewade51]

Just added this important piece for my integration PC, a Browns Hank Thompson original photo. He integrated the team but only spent a month with them before going back to the KC Monarchs so photos of him with the team are very scarce.

Photo by George Dorrillimg159.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[todeen]

1940 WS publicity photo, expected game 1 lineup. Boston Herald archives.




Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[Schlesinj]

Posted this in the Memory Lane thread, but looks good in two. A bunch of George Burke autos some better than other from 1949 WS Team. I think they are type 1 but don’t want to open the back to find his address stamp.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

1946/47 (it is described in different places as from either year) Cleveland Buckeyes photo.

I believe this is likely a Type I, and would welcome any perspectives on it. (My reasoning is that the image quality is very sharp, so I don't believe it could be a Type III, and the stamp on the back with just a two digit zip code indicates it was not a recent print, and I don't assume that they were reprinting Negro League photos much in the 50's and 60's though I could be wrong).

Originally Posted by Schlesinj

Posted this in the Memory Lane thread, but looks good in two. A bunch of George Burke autos some better than other from 1949 WS Team. I think they are type 1 but don’t want to open the back to find his address stamp.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Both of these are fantastic pieces! Thank you for sharing.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[obcbeatle]

Hello, I hope it's ok to ask here about photo types as they might apply to vintage photos from Hollywood. If not I will desist. I am trying to understand Type 1's from Type 2's from Type 3's, etc. For instance, the first photo below came with documentation which clearly dates the photo (code #1198, Landis/Costello) as originally taken in 1928, and then re-published in this example in 1946. Would that make this 1946 photo then a Type 2? The next photo (Hedy Lamarr) came with no documentation and is dated at the bottom as 1946, the year the film was released. Would that make the Lamarr photo a Type 1? What is confusing to me in this example is that both these photo I believe were promos, perhaps sent to theaters and elsewhere, and mass produced. Thus they wouldn't qualify as Type 1 or Type 2, correct? I guess I'm confused about how the re-use of an original negative years later, particularly when re-producing photos en mass to the public or elsewhere, effects/determines the Type (1,2,3, etc.). All the photos are blank backed BTW. Thank you for any insights. PS: Just to keep this baseball related, the JJ repro is one of my favorite Jackson poses!

[todeen]

Originally Posted by obcbeatle

Hello, I hope it's ok to ask here about photo types as they might apply to vintage photos from Hollywood. If not I will desist. I am trying to understand Type 1's from Type 2's from Type 3's, etc. For instance, the first photo below came with documentation which clearly dates the photo (code #1198, Landis/Costello) as originally taken in 1928, and then re-published in this example in 1946. Would that make this 1946 photo then a Type 2? The next photo (Hedy Lamarr) came with no documentation and is dated at the bottom as 1946, the year the film was released. Would that make the Lamarr photo a Type 1? What is confusing to me in this example is that both these photo I believe were promos, perhaps sent to theaters and elsewhere, and mass produced. Thus they wouldn't qualify as Type 1 or Type 2, correct? I guess I'm confused about how the re-use of an original negative years later, particularly when re-producing photos en mass to the public or elsewhere, effects/determines the Type (1,2,3, etc.). All the photos are blank backed BTW. Thank you for any insights. PS: Just to keep this baseball related, the JJ repro is one of my favorite Jackson poses!

I stole this from another member: Lordstan.

"Type I - A 1st generation photograph, developed from the original negative, during the period (within approximately two years of when the picture was taken).

Type II - A photograph, developed from the original negative, during the period (more than approximately two years after the picture was taken).

Type III - A 2nd generation photograph, developed from a duplicate negative or wire transmission, during the period (within approximately two years of when the picture was taken).

Type IV - A 2nd generation photograph (or 3rd or later generation), developed from a duplicate negative or wire transmission, during a later period (more than approximately two years after the picture was taken)

Unfortunately many sellers misdescribe the photos they sell, some for nefarious reasons and some because they just don't know. The best advice is this. Buy the picture, not the authentication or seller description, whether they use the type description or not. Good pictures are good pictures regardless of how they are classified or described."

I don't know how to tell apart Type 1 & 2 because I'm not a photography expert. But Type 3 is easy, a photo of a photo (2nd generation) just isn't as clear, or its got hazy details. My 1940 Reds team photo I posted just a few posts back is Type 3. It's a wire photo, and the team logos on their chest have noticeable print lines. But it's dated on the back from 1940. It's still amazing.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[obcbeatle]

Thank you, thank you. So perhaps it doesn't matter how many photos were produced off the original negative, just that for Type 1 not more than 2 years past, and for Type 2, 2+ years? So in my examples the Hedy Lamarr is likely a Type 1, and the 1928 Landis/Costello from 1946 likely a Type 2 (although that is almost 20 years past!). I also agree about the use/mis-use of the "Type" photo designations. It is more important to "buy the photo", just as it is more important to "buy the card" than go by a TPG grade, when collecting. Photos from the original negative clearly look better than photos not from the original negative. However, I'm not a photographer either so I don't know if copies of negatives are almost as clear as the originals. I suspect not. Thank you for the reply!