Bobby Veach original photos advice
 

Attached are 2 identical photos of Bobby Veach. The first is dated May 1925 and noted as NYAL with International Newsreel credit; the second is dated Oct 1925 with Conlon/Cleveland News credit and reference to Washington.

I cant figure out if both or neither are real. He did play early in year for NY and later to Washington. But the credits throw me off. Could be Conlon sold it to International Newsreel without his own credit?

(The Veach label on the 2nd one is on a picture frame not originally on the photo)

Both appear to be Type 1 photos. We know Conlon worked with other companies sometimes but even his well publicized relationship with Underwood at a few times in his career is a huge mystery. Sports photographers back then were employees of newspapers so if their editor wanted to share photos, thats what happened.

Also, looks like a Babe Ruth photo-bomb in the background!

As I look at these more closely, they are not identical. Note the stadium tier in background is level in one shot and at a pretty good angle in the other shot. Figure in background at right is also closer to the border than in the other photo. Maybe from same negative but just printed at slightly different angles

On second thought, they seem like 2 different photos like taken at same or nearly same time.

I like idea that Ruth is in background!

Back then, news services rarely credited/listed the photographer.

For old news photos and Hollywood photos, you can do research to try and figure out the photographer, and it's often someone famouse. For movie stills, you can look up the movie and see who were the photographers

Looks like the same negative but cropped slightly different during printing.

They rotated the negative about 5º or so counterclockwise for the second print. In both photos you can see that his right shoulder is parallel with the upper deck façade. In the first photo the façade is almost parallel with the top of the photo. Also the field level wall runs directly across the photo. In the second photo both the façade and wall slope downwards right to left.

That seems like best explanation, but...

The earlier version has a International Newsreel credit. I always assumed that this reflected a copyright on the image(?)

If Conlon was photographer, given markings on the later photo referencing Washington, he must have sold the photo without his stamp to International Newsreel used in the earlier photo, and then later in the year provided same to Cleveland News?

Can anyone shed some light on how these credits work?

Photographers and news services shared images all the time. These were not seen as important items beyond a few days after they were first used and they often reciprocated with images at later dates. I have seen lots of letters between editors at papers and even some notes on the backs of some images sent from one paper to another with things like "Thought you could use this for your sports paper". I believe within the circle of newspapers, there was a very loose handshake agreement about copyrights of images. Outside that circle, say in the world of commercial advertising, I believe the rights of the photographs were a bit more protected.

I agree. It's weird. I have seen photos of Detroit Tigers credited to Conlon that I know for a fact were taken by William Kuenzel of the Detroit Free Press.