How many rating points is a photographic memory worth?

The problem is, I don't know where you get your numbers, so I have no idea how accurate they are. There are positions that computers evaluate incorrectly, but there are surely lots of positions strong human players evaluate incorrectly as well.

I will warn though that when studying with an engine, one should play out many moves into the positions it spits out at them, before trusting the evaluation attached to it. A lot of times a computer thinks a position is promising for a while but then suddenly changes its mind drastically. In particular, I find computers incorrectly judge positions where optically it seems nice for one side, but that side doesn't have a clear plan of how to improve their position.

Good point. I once tried to train my visualization by following a game "blindfold" with only sight of the starting position. After about 10 moves the board just became a distraction and I closed my eyes, and it was like a weight was lifted off my back. It was so much easier to move the peices entirely in my head.

It was just my best guess, which isn't very good. I'm thinking of closed positions and non-tablebase endgames, where a human's ability to plan and use strategy is worth more than an engine's tactics and positional evaluation.

0 - if you don't understand what you are memorizing , it's useless.

Actually, I find it's kinda helpful (you don't worry so much about the details).

...I believe when Carlsen was 13, he could recite every country in the world, their capital, population and describe their flag. This in no way could be described as "normal memory"...most of us can't even remember what we had for breakfast last week Monday.

Sorry you can't believe it, but that's how it is for me and other people I've played blindfold with seemed to feel the same way. I mean you said it yourself: "you have to have to disbelieve what your own eyes are telling you!!! You have to pretend there is a piece here now when your eyes are showing something else". Which is a great point. If I'm trying to visualize a middle game where almost every peice has moved from its original square, or half of them have been traded off, looking at the starting position is going to be worse than useless. At least for me.

Blindfold is easier, though, when you look at an empty chess board.

I would find a blank board a tremendous help in trying to visualize a game.

same

It is for me.

I find that I can somewhat easily recall and play through a game and variations I'd analyzed in my head, and no board or pieces, but it's difficult for me to do any new analysis in my head only.

Back to the OP, I believe that this type of photographic memory would only help you improve faster but not actually help you perform higher then your rating.  example..

player 1 has photographic memory.  He has played chess and studied some annotated master games for 3 years. He has a fide rating of 2250.

player 2 does not have photographic memory. He has played chess and studied annotated master games for 10 years. He has a fide rating of 2250.

When player 1 and player 2 play a 10 game match against each other, the score happens to come out to be 5-5. 

Is that official, rdecredico, or is that just your personal interpretation? It's not always effective to broaden the issue -- if you blend memory with understanding as a justification for saying all you need is memory, this might not communicate effectively -- many may assume that you are saying you just have to recall specific ideas with no explanation of them (such as a new opening move -- knowing what it is, but not knowing why people like to play it).

I have to say I'm surprised to see how much serious discussion has been spawned off of a few facetious comments intended to highlight the folly of varying degrees of "bestness".

I'll buy a photographic memory for 1500 chess.com rating points.

At least 100 ELO imo.

What defines a photographic memory? Is it just a certain level of competence in a certain area of your brain, or is it like a genetic condition where you can clearly label "has it" and "doesn't?"

Yusupov played a Nezh game move for move and parlayed that into a "brilliancy prize," so it's worth something :)

When I was rated only 1300 OTB I was trying to calculate a long forcing variation and kept starting over... after 5 or 6 tries I just closed my eyes and did it in my head and only then could I finally see the end of it.

Obviously not a whole game, but I've seen 1500 players do blindfold chess fairly easily... I find it more difficult.

All this to say, I think it depends on the person's ability to visualize not on their chess rating.