David,
Your knowledge in this area far outweighs my own and I will defer to you. I absolutely understand that Halsman was a famous non-sports photographer. However, I think that who is behind the camera far outweighs who is in front of it. I saw some Ali shots by Halsman that are very impressive. Although I wish he had ventured more into baseball than the one subject I have been able to find his talent is undeniable. Nonetheless, I bet he could have made Alfred E. Neumann look like the Mick given the assignment to do so.
As a baseball photo collector I focus on members of the HOF. I occasionally forgo this preference if the artist behind the camera is identifiable or transcends his subject. In all honesty many of the popular prewar photographers such as Bain bore me as does Paul Thompson. Conlon is in a different category. In my humble opinion he is the Ansel Adams of baseball photography. Can you imagine what Adams would have done with depictions of Fenway Park in the winter?
As I stated earlier I have a modest baseball photo collection. Unfortunately, it is limited by the subject matter rather than artist. I wish that that the artists were as readily identifiable as their subjects but unfortunately with vintage news photography that does not seem to be the case.
The other night I purchased a photo of Musial's last game taken by Bob Kurt (see below). I think it is a beautiful image. Especially considering how African American players felt about Stan the Man. I also always wondered where that scarf came from that he was wearing during the ceremonies. Unfortunately I doubt I will ever be able to find a Bob Kurt image by searching for his name.
|