Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jerry Coker, post: 10238090, member: 18802&quot;]Thank you, yes, Type 1 &amp; Type 2, etc. are used a lot for sports photos as a way to designate a photo as being made from the original negative (Type 1/within 2 years &amp; Type 2/after 2 years), and thus help a buyer/seller determine a value. Example: Babe Ruth Type 1 photos are worth a lot more than Ruth Type 2&#039;s &amp; Type 3&#039;s since they usually have more clarity, are scarcer, etc. What I don&#039;t understand is if the Type designations apply to promo photos that were generated in Hollywood for mass consumption. I assume in that case they still used the original negative because the photos can look very nice and clear. But then again maybe not, because it could cause wear to the negative over time?, so they might have used a copy of the negative, or taken a photo of a photo, before distribution to the masses? In the latter case I believe that would designate the photos as Type 3, 4, etc. (photos not from the original negative), a photo with less clarity than a Type 1/2. Sorry for the confusion. I used to be a sports card/memorabilia collector, and the Type designations are common in that genre. In the end the Type designations probably don&#039;t matter that much to the average collector. A photo collector should collect what they like regardless of a Type designation. And I suspect most photo collectors look for the photos with the best clarity anyway, regardless of what Type the photo might be classified.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in