I agree with Gary's assessment. One of the key assets of a good baseball tintype is that the player or players are holding a bat and ball. This one is lacking clearly visible equipment, hence the low estimate. But your image is nicely posed and certainly appealing.
Also, daguerreotypes were introduced in 1839 and their heydey was roughly 1840-55. By the Civil War, they were virtually gone. Almost all images in the 1860's were either CdV's or tintypes.
Last edited by barrysloate; 06-28-2012 at 06:30 AM.
|