[drc]

First, I've read the type 1 type 2 etc definitions-- and I'm not saying the categorizations are wrong or in error. If you you read the categorizations, they are literally sound. If I thought they were errant, then I would have a bigger issue.

My main issue is 'original' is a common word that people know. Even someone off the street would have a good idea what an 'original' photo means. It's like 'game used baseball bat'-- I bet most non-collectors would accurately guess what that term means.

Yet, I hear people getting confused to what type I means-- "What is a type 1 photo? What's the difference between Type 1 and Generation 1?" And when I say "Type 1 means original" they say "Oh, okay. Now I know." That's why I say we should use the world 'original'-- because about everyone knows what that means. It's a commonly understood term, so it makes sense to use it over one that confuses people.

From my personal experience-- I was the photo advisor to Beckett, which uses the Type 1 Type 2 categorizations and I'd regularly have to go back and read what type 2, 3 etc means because I'd forget. Someone at Beckett would send me a image of a photo and say 'Does this look like type 2?' I'd know what was the photo (age, originality, etc), but would have to go look up what type 2 meant. Yes, it is rather funny. I laugh.

If you asked me right now if a photo was a type 3, I'd have to go to the PSA site and look up what type 3 meant again. I may know a lot about photos, but I haven't yet memorized the PSA type categorizations. And, in fact, I'm kind of proud of not knowing. It's kind of like color coding where one forgets which color represents which, and one wonders why they are color coded in the first place.

One note is PSA does have a nice description of the categories and you can look it up. And, again, I've read the type definitions and and, strictly reading them, don't think they're in error. I know some have an issue with the '2 year' rule which is fair. If i was allowed to change only one little detail it would be the '2,' so I guess I agree on that argument.

In conclusion, I prefer common English words to describe. Where a newbie may still have technical questions but will have the general gist. If you say a photo was "shot in 1930 and printed years later," someone off the street may have a bunch of fair photography questions, but will automatically understand that the photo was made a long time after the image was shot.