Quote:
Originally Posted by Runscott
I was hoping someone would take the bait, but Lance -not you 
The buyers of slabbed photos do so for what PSA/DNA is telling them. A lot of the rest of it is hidden under the plastic. Many sellers rely on the PSA/DNA slab to 'say it all' - it basically relieves them of the responsibility that you have described. Right here on the forum we see new collectors asking questions about slabs as if that's the main thing they need to understand, while others show little or zero knowledge about simple things like Kodak watermarks on the back of the photos. Too much focus on what PSA/DNA is going to do with the photo.
PDA/DNA is effectively disguising photos as soon as they put them in an official slab with their designation in a nice little slip...like cards. In fact, I bet many collectors buy them this way because it allows them to be collected the same way you would a slabbed card, and because the slabs with their identical PSA/DNA inserts, add uniformity to an otherwise very creative-looking collection (insert my oft-used disclaimer here).
But, it's a system that is working for those who use it, much like autograph authentication and slabbing of cards, so it's really up to those collectors to speak up if they have concerns, and they don't seem to. So all I'm doing here is discussing, because the subject is interesting and involves my hobby. Hope I haven't offended anyone, and I realize that my thoughts in this area will have no impact whatsoever, nor should they. |
Still not sure what the "bait" or the trap was, but at the risk of nibbling on it some more, here's some more thoughts (all intellectual discussion, no hurt feelings felt or intended here)...
I don't think that PSA/DNA, Henry, Rhys, David, you, me, or anyone else noting
on a flip or LOA any additions or removals of crop marks will do much to help to educate the buyers/sellers as to what they should be looking for. At least, not the buyers/sellers who defer to PSA for all of their thinking. Adding more info to the flip isn't going to cure buyers or sellers of their own laziness in educating themselves or doing their due diligence in describing (sellers) or scrutinizing (buyers) the photo itself. The collectors who check their brains at the door once they see that blue flip are not going to be deterred (or educated) by an extra line or two of text. They'll see "Shoeless Joe" and a big Roman Numeral I in the corner, and feel they have all the information they need. The ones who see past the flip and spend their time looking at the photo within will see the big, white swathes of paint, and decide whether/how much that editorial fabrication detracts from the overall appeal of the photo for them, same as they would if PSA/DNA hadn't chimed in with their opinion in the first place.
Maybe PSA could add another "tier" to their LOA service that would include things like notes about alterations and possible removal/alteration of alterations, but I think that whatever is the cheapest service that would get a Roman Numeral and company logo on the photo or its holder would continue to be the most popular.
Also, I think that once you start noting anything related to condition of photos on an LOA or flip, that opens the barn door wide for a paragraph (or several) of information that, in the long run, means very little to most photo collectors (as in, they don't care, not that they don't understand it). Who's to say whether markings were added or removed in the period vs. in modern times? In a case like this, in the period seems less likely, but you'd have to note any/all alterations just in case. Every mark on the back. Every sticker applied. Every stamp. Every wax pencil marking. Every bit of paint. Every spot that looked like it once had wax pencil or paint or a sticker or a marking. Every nick, fold, tear, crop, dog-ear, crazing of the emulsion, paper added, paper lost, on and on and on. None of which affects whether the photo is original to the period, and most of which can be seen in a good scan (with the bits that can't be seen well being the seller's responsibility to describe, since they're the one who has it in hand).
[I'll also add that, in retrospect, I think I went off on a tangent with the whole "condition note" paragraph, but it took a while to type, so I'll leave it]
Quote:
Originally Posted by glchen
The thing is most photos authenticated by PSA are not slabbed. PSA only slabs photos that are close to 8x10 in size. If the photos are smaller or larger than this size, they are not slabbed. You just the exact same photo you sent in, but with a sticker on the back matching it to the LOA. So, just ballparking it, I would say that less than 10% of photos from PSA are slabbed, so most photos are never hidden in plastic.
|
That might have been the case early on, but if you look at the more recent submissions (by picking a cert number and trolling up or down on PSA's website), I think you'll see that the current trend is much higher than 10% being in holders (at a quick glance, I would say somewhere around 70% go in slabs these days). Start somewhere around 1P04750 and work your way backwards if you want to see what I'm referring to.