NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-15-2018, 01:22 PM
Dewey's Avatar
Dewey Dewey is offline
Br377 D3w3y
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: El Lay
Posts: 605
Default

http://www.espn.com/blog/playbook/fa...robinson-in-47

A good article on the Pee Wee and Jackie question. Lester Rodney, writer for the Communist paper The Daily Worker, remembers the event though he only wrote about it many years later.
__________________
42 Collection: Jackie Robinson, Branch Rickey and the People Who Shaped the Story https://www.flickr.com/photos/158992...57668696860149
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-15-2018, 01:43 PM
earlywynnfan's Avatar
earlywynnfan earlywynnfan is offline
Ke.n Su.lik
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere and ash View Post
TomóI was actually referring to a different photograph, but the Conlon image of a player leading off first against the Cubs in 1908 is another example. I actually own the photograph, so I have a real incentive to push for the Merkle identification, but I believe very strongly that itís Herzog and not Merkle.

I hadnít thought of some of your examples, but like them all.

Kenóhereís the Homer in the Gloaminí.
Thanks, I was more thinking of the hit itself, but I know that's a lot to ask
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-15-2018, 03:30 PM
SAllen2556's Avatar
SAllen2556 SAllen2556 is offline
Scott
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 354
Default

This was 1910 wasn't it? Not really a famous moment, but this was the one I thought of when you mentioned famous action shots.

I'd be curious if any photos of the 1919 World Series show any "fishy" moments. Seems like there'd have to be one.

ty-cobb-072015-sn-ftrjpg_73dsfqts1kwj1nynns7ewt0bv.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-15-2018, 03:57 PM
sphere and ash sphere and ash is offline
P@u1 R31fer$0n
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 156
Default

Yes, it was 1910, but Conlon didn’t photograph the play because it was significant; it’s significant because Conlon photographed it. Despite nearly forty years taking baseball photographs, Conlon never photographed a newsworthy moment; he was primarily a portrait photographer.

The 1919 World Series helps support my conjecture: there isn’t an image of Morrie Rath being hit by Cicotte’s first pitch. During the 1920 World Series, by comparison, there are photographs of the triple play and the grand slam home run; the entire game was chronicled.

Last edited by sphere and ash; 09-15-2018 at 04:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-15-2018, 09:15 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 5,010
Default

I don't know camera history well enough, but I suspect large film rolls and auto advance weren't available until well after 35mm became the standard.

I can give a bit of a glimpse at why any important event from the 70's on was probably photographed.


A friend of mine worked at a camera shop that had a number of pros as clients. One did semi freelance work for one of the Boston newspapers. They'd give him a list of shots they wanted for articles, plus if anything special happened they'd pay extra.

It seemed like a cool job, but after looking for the photo credits I was amazed at how many nice shots he got. So I asked how.

The answer was that he always brought 3 cameras that had auto advance and worked from either a 1000 or 3000 image roll of film. He often ran two at once, and took somewhere around 10,000 images each home game.

He'd usually have the rolls developed and remove the shots the globe wanted keeping the rest. So if say "Yaz batting" was on the list they'd get every frame he took during his at bats.

When something special and unexpected happened he usually gave the paper the entire rolls of film undeveloped. I forget what it was exactly, but on particular one he actually left the game and brought the film directly to the paper. They developed it and had the picture in the afternoon edition, well before anyone else. yes, he was paid pretty well for that one.


I'd love to find his file of negatives, assuming the weren't tossed out at some point.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-15-2018, 09:42 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,477
Default

Well-said Steve.

Most of the greatest photos taken in the early 1900's were not of famous plays, but rather of famous players. The cameraman set up to maximize his chance for success, but we've all done that and ended up with garbage. In today's age of iphone photos, many people forget the time that was spent setting up a shot - lighting, depth-of-field, etc. for a roll of film that gave you 24 or 36 shots and you had to wait a while to get the prints back, and then you had to hope they didn't screw them up. If you look up what Ansel Adams did to set up a shot you'll get the extreme version, but a Charles Conlon effort was much closer to Adams than it was to a photographer even from the 1970's, much less a millennial with an iphone.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-15-2018, 10:32 PM
GKreindler's Avatar
GKreindler GKreindler is offline
Graig Kreindler
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 1,399
Default

I've gotta imagine that there are still some amazingly historic photos out there that will come to the public eye soon, whether it's through private collections or photo morgues...they just gotta...I hope.

That being said, I'd say the Chapman Mays incident is definitely a biggie in terms of significance. I've definitely never seen any shots from that game, but considering there's no shortage of photographs from the 1920 Yankees season (especially because of Ruth), I feel like somebody must have taken a shot of it, Afterall, when the beaning happened, Ruth was sitting on an astounding 42 home runs, and the Yankees were in the middle of a pennant race with Cleveland and the White Sox. So with the former coming to New York for the last time that season, it had to be considered an important series.

I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. I bet that photos were taken of the incident, but maybe they're long gone. And that's whether they were never published by any papers, or were and the negatives/prints were trashed at some point.

FWIW, I would also LOVE to see an image of Rath getting beaned during the 1919 World Series. What saddens me is that we know that less than twenty years later, having a photograph of the first pitch in the World Series (many times the first pitch for each game) was often done. And, at least by '36 or so, those photographs were often taken from behind home plate with the outfield in clear view. Can you imagine how cool it would have looked to have a photograph like that of Rath facing Cicotte? Even if he got plunked with Eddie's second offering, I just think the significance is insane.

Pair that with a photo from the Chapman beaning and you have two of the major hinge points to the coming of Babe Ruth's celebrity.

Man, I love this game. And for sh!t sure I'd love to paint either one.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-16-2018, 08:02 AM
sphere and ash sphere and ash is offline
P@u1 R31fer$0n
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 156
Default

I donít believe that the absence of any significant, newsworthy moment prior to October 1920, nor their ubiquity after that date, has anything to do with automatic film loading or advancing. I believe it has something to do with technology, but that technology already existed by 1917; there was just no need for it in baseball photography until October 1920. There is something else that created that need.

There was at least one photographer at the Chapman-Mays game, from the New York Daily News. I think itís likely, however, that he left before the beaning, either because he had what he needed or because he had to meet a deadline for an evening edition.

One can never say that no photograph of a historic moment before October 1920 will appear because of the problem of induction, but I think it is extremely unlikely. I tried to comb the Daily Newsí photo morgue to see if they had a photograph of Chapman, but couldnít gain admittance. Iíve been through all of the Daily Newsí paper archive for 1920, however, and there was nothing about it, so I doubt itís there.

Last edited by sphere and ash; 09-16-2018 at 10:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-16-2018, 03:37 PM
sphere and ash sphere and ash is offline
P@u1 R31fer$0n
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 156
Default

Iím re-upping my challenge to this impressive group: that you canít point to a single, significant moment on the field that was captured photographically prior to October 1920. And that you canít point to a single, significant moment that was *not* captured after October 1920.

These are pretty extreme statements, and Iím curious to see if they can be refuted. If anyone can do it, itís this group.

Finally, do you care how it came to be? Or is this merely of interest to a tiny handful of photography specialists?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-16-2018, 04:05 PM
prewarsports prewarsports is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,333
Default

Some of the earlier 3000 hit milestones I dont believe were not chronicled. I cant remember seeing anything on Cobb or Speaker getting theirs in 1921 but I seem to remember seeing Eddie Collins in 1925 but even that might have been an older stock photo used for the event. By contrast, in 1942 when Paul Waner was closing in there were photographers everywhere and his actual 3000th hit was captured at field level. I also dont remember seeing anything from the actual game where GC Alexander got his 300th win in 1924, but by the time Lefty Grove did it it was well documented.

A lot of it had to do with the fact that we put a huge amount of emphasis on these events today but back in the day, I dont think people cared as much.

Going back to the 1919 World Series, it is VERY weird that there are more images of the 1918 and 1920 series than 1919. Maybe gamblers got to the newspapers and paid them off too!
__________________
Be sure to check out my site www.RMYAuctions.com
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Online Photography Identification Course drcy Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 5 11-02-2014 05:34 PM
WTB: A Portrait of Baseball Photography ibuysportsephemera Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 9 07-22-2013 04:00 PM
Sports photography question billyb Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 36 06-06-2013 06:57 PM
OT: Photography Help ibuysportsephemera Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 13 09-06-2012 09:05 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 AM.


ebay GSB