Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eddy on June 28, 2022 at 11:29am

Yes indeed ......  That's a huge difference in how it looks.  Worth preserving in my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 11:36am

That is what I thought as well. If I could get it and preserve it, it would still be a decent piece to have.

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 28, 2022 at 11:38am

Yes, and the signature does not show. This was at an angle so the immense emulsion crazing and cracking don't show. I'm pretty sure it will appear closer to the other photos shown in hand.

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 11:42am

Here's another photo. The seller does indeed note the light signature, and the damage to the photo in the description. They were fully upfront about the item. 

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 28, 2022 at 11:41am

More folks should see and comment.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 11:45am

I agree. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 28, 2022 at 11:50am

Here is sellers Alan Ladd. Must be from the same batch as the emulison damage and all looks about the same. This is also very poor quality. These are problem pieces to be sure.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 11:52am

It is the same seller, yes. It appears that the original owner did not properly store the images, and it's unfortunate. It's just the cheapest Frank signature I've seen and to me, worth the risk for preservation. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 28, 2022 at 11:52am

...Here's another photo. The seller does indeed note the light signature, and the damage to the photo in the description. They were fully upfront about the item. ...

They are supposed to be!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 11:54am

Indeed, but unfortunately it is the internet, and not many sellers would and would just take advantage of the piece at hand. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 28, 2022 at 11:59am

I think they are. They decribed this condition as "Vintage photo has lots of wear including surface creases with a light signature." - that is about as nebulous and summary as you can get with this item.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dylan Fritch on June 28, 2022 at 12:01pm

To me, it just seems like they worded it rather plainly and straight forward. It is indeed lots of wear, and I am sure most people would just say lots of wear and creases for a photo this age. If people bid on it, they are fully aware of what they are getting and the price attached.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page