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

[Bicem]

Foxx would technically be a type 3 as the original negative was not used to produce those. Chris posted the type 1 of that photo in the pickup thread, notice the difference of image clarity.

Still a great card/photo!

[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.

[Lordstan]

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


Sent from my SM-F946U using Tapatalk

[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

[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

[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.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Big Red Machine

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

Awesome pickup... it was me that you outbid. If you want to sell Griffey, Morgan, Geronimo or Concepcion, please PM or let me know. Would love to own just one of these. Nice score!

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Big Red Machine

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

If anybody won the Cardinals lot and would sell me the Red, please reach out.

Great buy btw!

[Big Red Machine]

Thank you. I'd like to keep the set together for now. I'll let you know if I decide to break it up.

Originally Posted by perezfan

Awesome pickup... it was me that you outbid. If you want to sell Griffey, Morgan, Geronimo or Concepcion, please PM or let me know. Would love to own just one of these. Nice score!

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Big Red Machine

Thank you. I'd like to keep the set together for now. I'll let you know if I decide to break it up.

Yah, keep it together. You'd eventually regret it if you pieced it out. Knee-jerk reaction... I was still in the "denial phase" of being out-sniped.

[71buc]

I picked up these original snapshots from the same seller of the Reds photos above. The Mays, Seaver, Berra, and both Mantles shots appear in the 1976 SSPC card set. The action shots of DiMaggio and Mantle were taken at an old timers game.

[TCMA]

Originally Posted by Big Red Machine

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

Good stuff! These were likely originally purchased through Baseball Nostalgia in Cooperstown close to when the SSPC cards were released.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by 71buc

I picked up these original snapshots from the same seller of the Reds photos above. The Mays, Seaver, Berra, and both Mantles shots appear in the 1976 SSPC card set. The action shots of DiMaggio and Mantle were taken at an old timers game.

These are nothing less than breath-taking. When I working with early videotape in the late 1970s, there was a generation of movies we called "red movies" because whatever film stock they had been made from had lost of good deal of the colors other than red presumably due to some kind of chemicals that didn't age well. These photos, as well as the Reds photo set, exhibit the same look to them, and I wonder if it's the result of use of the same kind of chemicals used in the negatives or developing fluid, etc. I assume there are experts in this stuff, and I haven't done any Googling on it, but I did find the similarity interesting.

[Bill77]

My most recent pick up. My favorite aspect of the picture is the press photographers visible in the background, which makes me wonder if other views of this play are still around.

[Big Red Machine]

Can anyone assist me in dating this Gary Carter snapshot photo? I was curious to know if this photo can be lined to his rookie year of 1975. When did the Expos stop using all blue batting helmets? Thank you.

[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!

[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

[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

[BuzzD]

Won this after very aggressive bidding in last RMY auction. 1905 Bill Hogg, really scarce early Highlander photo

[Exhibitman]

Billy Wilder, director. 1950 publicity photo for Sunset Blvd.

[Topnotchsy]

WWII baseball photos:

- Joe DiMaggio
- Bob Feller
- Jackie Robinson
- Ted Williams

[Fandom0610]

Added these to my collection

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Fandom0610

Added these to my collection

Cool photo!

Am I crazy, or does LeBron look like David Robinson in this photo?

[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).

[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!

[todeen]

Originally Posted by 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!

Here's another example of a Type 3. It's pretty easy to tell in hand that it's a copy of an original. It's very grainy, even Lombardi's face is not clear. And I believe the crumpled top left corner has no texture when you run your finger over it. But I believe it's a news archive photo, with a description of the back. I would need to dig it out again to look.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[obcbeatle]

Nice, a lot going on in that photo, thanks for sharing! Love seeing team/player collections! I too have some Type 3, 4's I believe, mostly Giants as I'm a Giants/Braves collector. I believe the Giants photo below is a Type 3 wire photo, but I'm not positive. Having grown up in SF in the 60's/70's it is a highly treasured photo to me regardless of Type designation I did a little more research yesterday and could not find anything that says the volume of photos created off an original negative effects the Type designation. So in my examples I'll assume the Hedy Lamarr is a Type 1, and the Landis/Costello a Type 2, regardless of the number of promo photos created off the negative. Does anybody know a good forum for non-sport photo collectors? Thank you for the replies!