Need Help Identifying This King Kelly Cabinet

[Schwertfeger1007]

**Not For Sale**

Does anyone here happen to know anything about this card?

Appears to be an image of King Kelly attached to a Wright Studio Mount.

I've never come across anything like it so figured I'd ask here.

Any help is appreciated

-Brian

[BeanTown]

Wow! I have never seen that in 30 years of collecting. Very cool item you have there Brian

[2dueces]

Wow

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 2dueces

Wow

*I agree. That cabinet is cool. I always like this kind of pose of Kelly...
.

[D. Bergin]

I don't want to burst any bubbles, but it looks like a photo (possibly albumen?) of an already existing hanging framed photo, which was then trimmed and pasted to a photo studio mount.

Couldn't say exactly when it was made, but I'd guess late 1910's to early 1920's.

Still pretty cool, but I sense it's a really old (hopefully), fantasy piece.

[LEHR]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I don't want to burst any bubbles, but it looks like a photo (possibly albumen?) of an already existing hanging framed photo, which was then trimmed and pasted to a photo studio mount.

Still pretty cool, but I sense it's a really old (hopefully), fantasy piece.

A fantasy piece was my first thought as well. It just looks...off.

[Leon]

I guess I should have said cool, if real. It is kind of shiny. First thing I thought of was a Ramly.
.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I don't want to burst any bubbles, but it looks like a photo (possibly albumen?) of an already existing hanging framed photo, which was then trimmed and pasted to a photo studio mount.

Couldn't say exactly when it was made, but I'd guess late 1910's to early 1920's.

Still pretty cool, but I sense it's a really old (hopefully), fantasy piece.

These were most of my immediate thoughts as well, but this is not my area of the hobby. Didn't wish to be like so much of the internet and weigh in with an opinion lacking in true knowledge. It was only a logical observation on my part, but nice to hear I wasn't alone in the thought.

But, since I'm replying, I would ask what others better versed than me think about a couple of things:

--Does the photo not look sloppily pasted atop a cabinet backing?

--Does the cabinet backing itself look super fresh to anyone else's eye? (This could obviously be easily forgiven, as so many of these rested in albums for over a century, barely touched.)

--It's been my observation that much more pride and care was taken in everything back then to have allowed for such a sloppy cut job on the photo. Those wavy, hand cut edges just wouldn't fly in period quality control, would they?!

I would love to see this thing examined under a VSC. I wonder if the choice of a black cabinet backing was done on purpose in an effort to help obscure anything that may be/may have originally been on the cabinet behind the photo.

Again, I loathe opining on anything unless I'm more knowledgeable in the subject matter, so please take my words as observational in nature only.

[D. Bergin]

Sounds like nit-picking probably, but if it’s not a completely modern invention, I’d lean more towards calling it an early 20th Century mounted photo, rather than a late 19th Century cabinet card.

Card guys won’t like that designation, but the photo guys won’t care much.

Haven’t seen David Rudd post here in awhile, but I’m sure he’d have an informed opinion on it.

[Schwertfeger1007]

@BillyCox-

I'd disagree with your comment about "pride and care in everything back then" as I'm a long time Old Judge collector and it's rare to find a solid cut + centered N172. Even N173's (while marketed as "premium") often times had photos sloppily affixed to the mounts.

I don't doubt that it's "real" as I'm holding it in front of me. I'm more curious as to when it was made or produced.

It was sold last year in a Hindman Auction in a lot alongside several other authenticated pieces from the 1890s so it wouldn't surprise me to learn that this was a post mortem piece (~1894) as another member suggested.

I'm def not the expert and honestly don't even know what "VSC" is but I'll happily bring it with me to Cleveland in July if someone can point me in the direction of an expert to take a close look at it.

[teza11]

Here's a link to the Hindman auction sale. A very impressive grouping.

https://bid.hindmanauctions.com/lots...ting-cleveland

Jeff

[spec]

Jeff,
Thanks for the link! IMHO some of the Hindman IDs of Boston players are not accurate. Jimmy Collins is not included and I am dubious the second mustachioed man is King Kelly. Also, Harry Gleason is one of the uniformed Boston player portraits (same image as E107). The Wright cabinet of Kelly may be period, but it seems post-career at best.
B0b Rich@rds0n

[brianp-beme]

I don't remember seeing an auction house estimate be so far off as this lot of cabinets that included the Kelly. The Hindman Auction estimate was $400-600.

The lot of 19 photos went for $80,000.

The majority of these cabinets show 19th century players in MLB uniforms. Did they really think the final winning bid on authentic cabinets from this era would be anywhere close to their 3 digit estimate?

Brian

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Schwertfeger1007

@BillyCox-

I'd disagree with your comment about "pride and care in everything back then" as I'm a long time Old Judge collector and it's rare to find a solid cut + centered N172. Even N173's (while marketed as "premium") often times had photos sloppily affixed to the mounts.

I'll concede regarding OJs. They were mass-produced and perhaps not as much care was given to them. So, let me pose the question again without OJs in the picure. Or, more specifically directed toward studio photography/cabinets. I just don't recall seeing such a poor effort being made in regards to an item such as this with the wavy, hand cut edges. Has anyone else seen more of this sort of thing? I haven't spent my life immersed in the study of these, so it's an honest question.

[BeanTown]

Super impressive lot and what’s a shocker is the estimate! The auction thought this lot would fetch 400-600 and in reality it fetched 80,000. I guess both the auction com0any and the consignor didn’t have a clue as to value. I bet there were some eager collectors hoping to win this lot at a tremendous value.

[Jobu]

This looks to me like a photo of a painting cut out and mounted to the backing. I am curious - Brian, can you tell if the frame was a real frame or if it is a painting/illustration of a frame? If it is the former, it is cool to think that that actual painting may be out there somewhere. If it is the latter, I wonder what printed item this was cut out of.

I am curious about the paper too. Can you post some close up photos out of the holder? I wonder if it is albumen or something else (including possibly not a photo but something that was printed) and the texture, sheen, and potential silvering will help.

[calvindog]

The mount is certainly real and period. I’m not sure I believe someone would make the effort to put that card onto that mount years later. Crazy rare image, I’ve never seen anything like it.

[griffon512]

Have these two steps been taken?

1. A web search that has found any period cabinets from Wright Studio with a similar design. (I was not able to find any)

2. Trying to find a tenant/ownership history for that address. If the records are thorough it could narrow down a date of production. It looks like 1145 Columbus Ave in Boston but it's hard to tell from the pic of the mount. If that address is correct call the Registry of Deeds, Suffolk County, MA office with this link: https://massrods.com/suffolk/. I'd feel more confident that it is authentic and period to the 19th Century if there were other examples from that studio and more obvious signs of aging on a black mount that is assumed to be 120+ years old. It's not hard to figure out that a period King Kelly cabinet is potentially worth tens of thousands of dollars so I wouldn't presume that this item is original without more digging. The best thing it has going for it right now is the other items in the Hindman lot.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by griffon512

Have these two steps been taken?

1. A web search that has found any period cabinets from Wright Studio with a similar design. (I was not able to find any)

2. Trying to find a tenant/ownership history for that address. If the records are thorough it could narrow down a date of production. It looks like 1145 Columbus Ave in Boston but it's hard to tell from the pic of the mount. If that address is correct call the Registry of Deeds, Suffolk County, MA office with this link: https://massrods.com/suffolk/. I'd feel more confident that it is authentic and period to the 19th Century if there were other examples from that studio and more obvious signs of aging on a black mount that is assumed to be 120+ years old. It's not hard to figure out that a period King Kelly cabinet is potentially worth tens of thousands of dollars so I wouldn't presume that this item is original without more digging. The best thing it has going for it right now is the other items in the Hindman lot.

Wright studio address in 1902
Wright Studio The_Boston_Globe_Sun__Mar_16__1902_.jpg

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Wright studio address in 1902
Attachment 622777

Good find