I just don’t understand the how some things are valued.

I collect old cameras, old photographs, daguerreotypes, ambrotypes and tintypes. From
auctions, ebay, antique stores and yard or garage sales. But by far most of my collection
is from my own and my wife’s relatives. While I treasure them all, the ones with a
personal attachment are my favorites. However I have a weakness for occupational
images, unusual family portraits and animals, especially pets from the past.

Daguerreotypes were the first of the photographic processes to be commercially viable.
However because of many problems such as long exposures, extremely difficult
processes to master and even some religious groups that considered the capturing of a
person’s image the work of the devil, the first daguerreotypes were mainly still life’s and
landscapes. Hardly enough to sustain an economical industry. Well, until over one
hundred and sixty years later.

 This daguerreotype, showing a country home along “a continuation of Broadway,” was likely taken in New York City, in October 1848 or earlier. It sold for $62,500 at a Sotheby’s auction.

Sold at Sotheby’s in 2009 for $62,500. An early daguerreotype taken before 1848.
Provenance (source of origin) states this is an early image of an estate in New York City. No known photographer. A definite rarity and being a daguerreotype it is a one and only
original. But $62,500? (Read more here)

Here is an Ambrotype, a few years later then the daguerreotype. Provenance is the
identified location and time period and the history of the ambrotype’s possession
through the family. Beautiful casing. Great condition and a historic, recognizable view.
Like the daguerreotype, ambrotypes were a one off image. So it is the only original.

Recently sold on Ebay for $875.

Pricey but still, an over $61,000 difference? So what accounts for the vast difference in
price? Both are historical representations of the time periods and the photographic
processes are very similar. Detail in this image is superior in my opinion. More money
then sense?

Fortunately technical improvements came fast. And the next step was portrait
photography, and now there was a way to really appeal to the public and have
something to sell. Photo studios popped up all over! Still an item for the well off.
However what it did do is create a large market for portraits of people. Unlike the rare
early daguerreotypes and ambrotypes of historic places, the rich and the famous had
their pictures taken in massive numbers. Which means there are still massive numbers of
daguerreotypes, ambrotypes and tin types available. But at what price?

This is considered to be the earliest photograph of a sitting president. John Quincy
Adams taken in 1843. It is due to be sold October 5, 2017. Estimated price is $150,000
to $250,000. We shall see! It is rare, has great provenance and in pretty good condition.
So it does have a lot going for it. (UPDATE: It sold!)

Philip Haas
ACTIVE 1830S-1860S
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
half-plate daguerreotype, in a mid-to-late 19th century ebonized wood wall frame, signed ‘J. Q. Adams’ and inscribed ‘Hon Horace Everett / Windsor / Vermont’ by Adams in ink on address leaf, an Everett family crest bookplate, inscribed ‘Presented by J. Q. A. to his Kinsman H. E. 1843’ and annotated in an unidentified hand in ink, and with other labels and inscriptions on the reverse of the frame, 1843
Half-plate

Four main factors contribute to the selling price of these old photo images. First is the
subject. Early images of landscapes and buildings are highly valued. Provenance would
be next. With high prices comes the likelihood of fakes. So the more proof of it’s
authenticity the higher the price. Size is probably the next factor. A full plate image is
approximately 6.5 x 8.5” and these are the rarest. A quarter plate image, approximately
3.25 x 4.25” are harder to find but still relatively common. And the most popular size
was a sixth plate, perfect size for portraits, at 2.75 x 3.25”. Plate sizes pretty much
carry through with Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes and tin types.

Billy the Kid and the croquet game is an interesting case. Purchased in 2010 for $2, it
has an appraised value of $5,000,000. The second only known photo of Billy the Kid,
it’s a 4×5” tintype reportedly taken in the summer of 1878 after a wedding. It shows
Billy the Kid and his gang, the Regulators playing croquet. So the subject is definitely
interesting and historic. It has been authenticated by professionals so the provenance is
there and the size at 4×5 inches is a relatively large size. And over all condition is very
good. The only other known image of Billy the Kid was sold in 2011 for $2.3 million.
What I find interesting is these two Billy the Kid images can fit into several categories of
collectors. Definitely into history collectors. Even could be considered an occupational
photo. And also a wild west collector would love to have either of these two. But $2.3
million? $5 million?

Do keep in mind that in 1853, The New York Daily Tribune estimated that three million
daguerreotypes were being made annually. By 1854 daguerreotypes were reaching their
end and being replaced by the cheaper to produce ambrotypes and the production of
these were in even greater numbers then the daguerreotypes. Then along came the
tintypes, cheaper yet, and the numbers of photos people had taken soared! Meaning
large numbers of daguerreotypes, ambrotypes and tintypes are still out there. Thirty to
one hundred dollars is a reasonable price to pay for daguerreotypes or ambrotypes if
they are in good condition. Tintypes are of lesser quality but many have held up
extremely well. And they are cheap. One dollar to ten dollars can buy a nice condition,
in good shape smaller tintype. Large tintypes are rather rare and will cost more. And
many households still have old shoe boxes filled with these treasures. And their
emotional wealth far exceeds that of Billy the Kid or John Quincy Adams in my opinion.

-Bon Walden

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY