View Single Post
  #27  
Old 09-25-2014, 06:52 PM
Forever Young's Avatar
Forever Young Forever Young is offline
Weingarten's Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fargo, ND
Posts: 2,056
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecatspajamas View Post
The Type system is for classification, not assigning merit or artistic value. Whether a photo is Type 1 or not doesn't make it 2 better than any other photo which happens to be a Type 3. And if you really really like a photo re-shot from an attractive arrangement of die-cut, hand-lettered, artistically-embellished 1st generation photos, I mean really really REALLY like, it still doesn't make it a Type 1. Desirability does not define Type classification, and a Type number is not a comment on a photo's artistic merit.

Put another way, a photo's Type may affect its desirability, but desirability does not affect its Type.

To answer the OP's question, the 1909 Pirates composite is a Type 3. And a very desirable one at that.
Correct. I thought that I already established that. The question I thought was are "all" this or that. I think I am missing pieces .. I am on my phone. My 1915 photo is def type. .
__________________
[I]"When you photograph people in colour you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in B&W, you photograph their souls."
~Ted Grant


Www.weingartensvintage.com

https://www.facebook.com/WeingartensVintage

http://www.psacard.com/Articles/Arti...ben-weingarten

ALWAYS BUYING BABE RUTH RED SOX TYPE 1 PHOTOGRAPHS--->To add to my collection
Reply With Quote