Can we finally lay the "Type I" photo BS to rest?

[Lordstan]

David,
I agree that some pictures cannot be dated to specific interval between when it was taken and when it was printed, but I also know that many can. As we see from the recent release of The Sporting News, The Chicago Sun, and The Baltimore News archives, many, if not most of the pictures have multiple date stamps and other notations. Many of these will help date when the picture was printed. Using clues in the pictures like uniforms, stadium architecture, and even weather conditions can help date when the picture was taken.
Neither of these are absolutely foolproof, but I do think they fall within a reasonable margin of error.
I disagree that we should throw out, or not try and create, a classification system to identify photographs.

Also, I don't understand what you mean by "unenforceable." Nobody is enforcing anything. To me this system, like all other classification systems, allows people to communicate more efficiently. If I try and sell you a picture and say it's a type 1, you immediately know 2 things. First that I believe that my pictures dates from the immediate time frame of the pic being taken. Second, will be that I think the picture is more valuable than just a regular print. Both of these may or may not have an impact on what you do next. First, you will likely inspect the picture and you will either agree or disagree with my determination. Second, you will evaluate my price. If it fits into your valuation of the picture, you will buy it. If not, you won't. The "type" designation will not likely have any impact on what you do.

I don't have a problem with the system. In general, I don't care for grading and authentication as a generality, but that is not the fault of the classification system.

Interestingly enough, while It seems that people are suspicious of the financial incentives of labeling Type 1,2, etc, I think, in some ways, the system may have more of the opposite effect. Type 1's, or originals, if one prefers, will always command a premium price, regardless of labeling. An as far as mistakes go, I think the type system with year dating rules, will be more likely to date an older photograph as newer thus lessening the value, as opposed to the opposite. The picture in the original post is, obviously an exception where having the pic dated later probably increased value.

The title to the thread is "Can we finally lay the "Type 1" BS to rest?" I don't think that picture in any way speaks to the "Type" system being valid or not. I think it was a simple mistake, which might challenge your faith in PSA's ability to correctly identify/classify a photo, but doesn't undermine the classification system itself. IMO, given my new found knowledge about the year the lights were installed in the ballpark, that picture should have been labeled as unclassifiable or just vintage.

Mark