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 write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

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
  #1  
Old 09-27-2016, 11:38 PM
Jantz's Avatar
Jantz Jantz is offline
Archive
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,737
Default A photo mystery

First off, thank you to any and all who offer this rookie some help. Somewhat of a mystery to me, but probably not for you guys.

I bought a 1939 World series photo two years ago and it appears to me to be an original photo. So recently I'm cruising Ebay and I notice an auction for another original 1939 World Series photo of the exact same shot. My photo measures 8" x 10" while the Ebay seller describes their photo as measuring 9" x 7".

Given the dimensions of the photos, the images are slightly different as you will see by the two photos below. One interesting aspect is that slightly above DiMaggio's cap and slightly below Crosetti's feet faint red lines appear in the exact location of which the other photo is cropped. After looking at my scan, I see the red line can't be seen above DiMaggio's cap, but is visible just above Lombardi's mask in the dirt.

I will post front/back photos below so you can see what all is involved here.

Being a photo rookie, I have a few questions as well.

Are both of these photos original or would either be considered a Type I? Given the fact that mine has column measurements, would mine be the original and the other photo be a transmitted version given that it has a reproduction credit stamp, along with "From Chicago" on the slug? Not looking to sell my photo, just needing some clarification.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Jantz

(My 39 WS photo is first and the Ebay photo following.)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg WS photo 1 001.jpg (71.5 KB, 546 views)
File Type: jpg WS photo 2 001.jpg (66.2 KB, 545 views)
File Type: jpg WS photo 3.jpg (66.9 KB, 553 views)
File Type: jpg WS photo 4.jpg (68.6 KB, 553 views)
File Type: jpg WS photo 5.jpg (72.8 KB, 553 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-28-2016, 12:14 AM
Dewey's Avatar
Dewey Dewey is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 744
Default

The ebay photo and slug are stamped 1939. Your photo is stamped 1955 and the attached article reads like a historical retrospective. I'd guess yours is later based on those two things, but I don't really know. An expert will chime in I'm sure.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-28-2016, 12:49 AM
Jantz's Avatar
Jantz Jantz is offline
Archive
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey View Post
The ebay photo and slug are stamped 1939. Your photo is stamped 1955 and the attached article reads like a historical retrospective. I'd guess yours is later based on those two things, but I don't really know. An expert will chime in I'm sure.
Brett

I understand what you are saying, but what about the additional lower portion of my photo and not the Ebay photo. Lombardi's mask is not pictured in the Ebay photo. Basically my photo is a fuller photo while the other is a cropped version, although the right sides of each photo are different as well. Like I said in my initial post, its a mystery to me.

After further review, even both back captions differ. Just noticed this. One mentions Bill Werber, while the other states that Bucky Walters is on the left.

Jantz

Last edited by Jantz; 09-28-2016 at 01:04 AM. Reason: added more
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-28-2016, 07:27 AM
SAllen2556's Avatar
SAllen2556 SAllen2556 is offline
Scott
Scott All.en
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 600
Default

I'm no expert but let me take a stab at it. Your photo looks a lot sharper than the ebay one. I wonder if yours was reprinted by the actual newspaper that owned the negative. That would explain the different cropping. Newspapers often went back in their archives to reuse photos for retrospective stories like the one on the back of your photo, and they would have had their original negatives. I know the Detroit News even had a library in the building that housed their stuff. And even though it's an AP photo, I think AP would often get their photos from local newspapers. So I don't think it's technically a Type I, but I like yours better.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-28-2016, 09:06 AM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,466
Default

One says wirephoto, which isn't type I.

Though, for future reference, originals of the same shot can be sized and cropped differently. Printing from the original negative, the photographer or developer can make different size photos and crop the images in different ways.

Last edited by drcy; 09-28-2016 at 09:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-28-2016, 11:02 AM
Forever Young's Avatar
Forever Young Forever Young is offline
Weingarten's Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fargo, ND
Posts: 2,056
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy View Post
One says wirephoto, which isn't type I.

Though, for future reference, originals of the same shot can be sized and cropped differently. Printing from the original negative, the photographer or developer can make different size photos and crop the images in different ways.
Exactly. The cropping has nothing to do with it being more or less original than another ; particularly in this case.



Also, clarity was mentioned here.

A). The op's example was scanned and the other is a picture taken from a camera , at an angle , not even flat.

B) there can be differences in clarity between 2 originals off the original negative anyway.
__________________
[I]"When you photograph people in colour you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in B&W, you photograph their souls."
~Ted Grant


Www.weingartensvintage.com

https://www.facebook.com/WeingartensVintage

http://www.psacard.com/Articles/Arti...ben-weingarten

ALWAYS BUYING BABE RUTH RED SOX TYPE 1 PHOTOGRAPHS--->To add to my collection

Last edited by Forever Young; 09-28-2016 at 02:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-28-2016, 09:00 PM
Jantz's Avatar
Jantz Jantz is offline
Archive
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,737
Default

Thanks for the replies and sharing your knowledge & experience. I appreciate it.

Jantz
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-29-2016, 11:12 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jantz View Post
Thanks for the replies and sharing your knowledge & experience. I appreciate it.

Jantz
+1...great information, thanks for helping!!
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-05-2016, 07:31 AM
thecatspajamas's Avatar
thecatspajamas thecatspajamas is offline
L@nce Fit.tro
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Franklin, TN
Posts: 2,432
Default

A little late to the party, but here's my take:

The OP's photo is dated 1955, and as others have stated, appears to have been issued in conjunction with a retrospective of the original event. The date stamping and notation of "wirephoto" on the paper caption are consistent with the photo having been sent "over the wire," with the OP's print being what came out on the other end of the wire. This would make it a Type IV photo: a duplicate photo printed more than 2 years after the image was shot. If the OP's photo is examined closely under magnification, the striations or "lines" that form the image should be able to be discerned. For more info on wirephotos, there is a ca. 1937 film on the wirephoto process here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LetlcmqZFyA

The photo on eBay has a dated paper caption and back stamping consistent with what the Associated Press used circa 1939. It would be considered a Type I photo, produced from the original negative within a short period after the image was shot.

Since both photos were issued by the Associated Press, and the cropping varies on each, it would seem reasonable that the AP held the original negative. They cropped/enlarged a portion of the image for the original photo on eBay which was sent to subscribers through the mail or by courier. About 16 years later, they pulled the negative out of the files, produced another print from it (utilizing more of the available image area to do so), and sent that image out "over the wire" to their subscribers to use with the retrospective story. The editor at the receiving end then added crop marks to the OP's photo to indicate what portion of the image he wanted to run with the story for that particular publication.
__________________
Ebay Store and Weekly Auctions
Web Store with better selection and discounts
Polite corrections for unidentified and misidentified photos appreciated. Rude corrections also appreciated, but less so.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-12-2016, 10:25 PM
Jantz's Avatar
Jantz Jantz is offline
Archive
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecatspajamas View Post
If the OP's photo is examined closely under magnification, the striations or "lines" that form the image should be able to be discerned.
Thank you for your input and taking the time to help.

Strange thing is though, there are no striations or "lines" in the photo. I know about the "lines" and looked for them with a 40x lighted loupe before purchasing the photo. I have a few other photos and have seen the transmission striations you are referring to before. So I have a good idea what they look like. There aren't any lines on the 1939 WS photo. I should have mentioned this in my original post.

I took some time and looked more closely at the paper caption on the back. Some of the edges are lose and there is more writing underneath the paper caption.

Could it be possible that my photo is an original that was reused in 1955 for a story since the Yankees were about to begin playing in the World Series? Or could the paper caption have been added later when the photo was reused? Keeping mind the dates on the back of my photo. September 26 & 27, 1955.

The first game of the 1955 World Series was held on September 28, 1955.

Thanks again for your help.

Jantz
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-13-2016, 12:18 PM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,466
Default

It looks like a wirephoto to me, but it is possible it is a wirephoto from 1939. The clipping and date stamp could be from a later re-usage of the photo.

Last edited by drcy; 10-13-2016 at 12:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-14-2016, 10:39 PM
thecatspajamas's Avatar
thecatspajamas thecatspajamas is offline
L@nce Fit.tro
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Franklin, TN
Posts: 2,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jantz View Post
Could it be possible that my photo is an original that was reused in 1955 for a story since the Yankees were about to begin playing in the World Series? Or could the paper caption have been added later when the photo was reused? Keeping mind the dates on the back of my photo. September 26 & 27, 1955.
I do not think so. While it is possible that a photo sent over-the-wire could have been held in the receiving subscriber's archives and reused years later, that does not appear to be the case here. The upside down date stamp, with time stamp, appears to be when the print was produced (i.e. when the duplicate rolled off of the wire photo apparatus on the receiving end), with the stamp above that being the date stamp applied when the photo was filed in the subscriber's archives. Also, had it been an original that was pulled from the subscriber's archives and reused, the credit line would not state "wirephoto" which was a term that the AP used specifically for their wire photo process and service.

Even absent any visible striations (which I will take your word for, as I cannot tell from my phone's screen), I stand by my earlier assessment that yours is a Type IV wire photo produced in 1955. Let me also be clear that I am not trying to disparage your photo in any way, but rather just trying to help you understand what you have. What value and level of desirability you place on it is up to you, as with many photos, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think it would be neat to have both versions as a paired piece for comparison/contrast.
__________________
Ebay Store and Weekly Auctions
Web Store with better selection and discounts
Polite corrections for unidentified and misidentified photos appreciated. Rude corrections also appreciated, but less so.
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
PHOTO MYSTERY SOLVED. Joss, HOPKINS, Rhoades, and McGuire bbpostcards Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 32 03-19-2013 09:41 PM
circa 1870's mystery mounted baseball photo bbpostcards Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 9 03-16-2013 03:24 PM
Solve a mystery... Two Davidsons one Photo... jalex Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 10 12-17-2012 04:52 PM
19th century photo mystery Michele Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 14 05-24-2012 12:26 PM
Could this mystery photo be an 1870s baseball player? Michele Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 5 06-11-2009 10:56 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:12 AM.


ebay GSB