Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicem
I think they are starting to refuse photos that have been restored (not counting trimming since press photos are often cut down from their original size at time of publication).
I just had a photo that was rejected due to chemicals being used to remove a secretarial signature from the front (I bought it after the restoration). It had been previously graded a type one with the signature.
|
That is interesting, I bought a photo recently and it had a distinct stamp of the original owner (I happen to own 4 others from the same collection). The photo did not have a PSA/DNA LOA, but the auction mentioned it had been previously authenticated. It was clearly a Type 1, so I had no issue with buying it.
After I received the photo, I was going to try and get a replacement LOA (it was not slabbed) and while doing some research I found the original photo from an older auction (same personal stamp location) and the photo was trimmed since it had been originally authenticated. I then looked up the authentication number and it was deactivated. I now wonder if it had been cleaned and trimmed and got rejected to get a new LOA. Maybe they have some new standards?
__________________
BST h2oya311, Jobu, Shoeless Moe, Bumpus Jones, Frankish, Shoeless Moe again, Maddux31, Billycards, sycks22, ballparks, VintageBen (for a friend), vpina87, JimmyC, scmavl
Last edited by Schlesinj; 05-04-2024 at 04:09 PM.
|