|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
David--There is nothing wrong with the writing |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: nickinvegas
Josh, |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Rich Klein
I'm glad to see that these are bringing so much scrutiny. My suggestion is that someone with NO axe to grind for EITHER side take a good hard look and examination of these items. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: The Other One (Julie)
......... |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
First, I wish to note that I only post as the registered hankron with Veruschka transiguration avitar. Not to suggest that there was anything wrong with the other david's posts, just clarifying that I don't post in under my name. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Rich Klein
I did not mean to insult you in any way for I certainly respect what you do. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
The funny thing about this whole situation is that Nick and Bob L. are nice folks, and have also been kind to me. Some with you, Rich ... You wish these types of debates were with people you didn't like so much! |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Brian Weisner
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Nick--I'll be down at the Ft Washington show next weekend and I'll bring along my framed Flynn "proofs" to compare them to these. Unfortunately, my guess is that they are the same animal (no need for two sets of proofs). I'm hoping that TIK will take back the framed piece he sold me since, based on David's inspection of the items, I believe they are not period. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: petecld
This could be a good warning sign to us buyers: |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: runscott
We are lucky to have a 19th century photography expert available to us, though I'm surprised he hangs around considering the response he gets any time he says something that someone doesn't want to hear. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: leon
I think Nick will do the right thing in the end as he has always done in the past. With that being said I do believe that an auction house has the responsibility to gaurantee something "is what it is" with substantial proof to warrant what they claim. If they don't have substantial proof then that also should be in the description of the item. Then the buyer can make their own decision.....just my 1 cent.....later |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Bob Lemke
With due respect to those auction houses which in the past refused to handle the Flynn photos in question (every Old Judge related photo, regardless of its original intent, has become a de facto "proof" in the hobby's estimation), I spoke at length with one of the hobby's most respected auction principals (I did not seek his permission, so won't name him here) who was instrumental in bringing the original Vermont trove of OJ-related materials from the attic to the hobby market. He told me that representative samples were sent to, and authenticated by, the firm of photography experts who were prosecution expert witnesses at the O.J. Simpson trial then on-going. The Flynn photos, like the grouping held by Jay Miller were mounted in a frame from which they have since wvidenly been extricated. It is evident the cardboard on which these were mounted is not contemporary with the 1880s, but I stand by my inexpert opinion that the photos themselves ARE 19th Century production. A question: If the Flynn pictures are latter-day reproductions, where are the glass-plate negatives? They don't appear to have been part of the Vermont find, or if they were, they have been squirreled away since the dispersal. It is great that American Memorabilia is going to have these available for inspection at Ft. Washington. I hope all the experts will avail themselves of the opportunity and report back here what they see. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: ramram
OK, I'll say what everybody is thinking - so these were the "experts" in the Simpson trial! Where did that road lead to? I'm not trying to make comment on the "OJ's" (excuse the pun)but I don't think anybody should hang their hat on anything associated with that "farce"...oops...I meant "trial". |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
The irony for me is that I sold almost all of my baseball photos and, for over a year, my research has almost been exclusively on modern fashion industry photos. Yet the questions I always get are about Ty Cobb, Addie Joss and Yogi Berra, and never whether that Kate Moss on eBay is legitimate. It is sincere my hope that, next time, the big auction house offers some bad Jean Shrimpton or Gia Carangi so I can argue about those instead. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Bob--First,I don't understand the significance of your questioning where the glass plate negatives are if these are not period prints. No one is saying that these prints were made yesterday, or last year, or ten years ago. What people are saying is that these photos were made some time after the late 1880s. Could have been 1895, could have been 1910. Regardless, why would one assume that the negatives would still have to be around. They are quite fragile and could have been destroyed or simply thrown away long ago. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: The other One (Julie Vognar)
were not period........yurg... |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Julie--I realize that and I'm sure Bob does too. That's not what we are talking about. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Bob Lemke
the person who authenticated the material from the Vermont find is a former chief of the FBI forensic photography (or it photography forensics) lab. Again, since I have not sought permission to use his name, I won't. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: petecld
Ok, so we have an "expert" source of information that can't or won't be named. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
I made an earlier list of problems, but one that is straightforeward is that it would have been practically impossible for an 1880s photographer to make a tintype that includes Old Judge style writing in the image. The primitive tintype process made this impossible. I will bet you that most avid non-sport tintype collectors on a 50 dollar a week collecting budget know this. I don't care whether they they work for the FBI or the Louvre, anyone who argues that that type of writing on a tintype is authentic is no expert. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: petecld
Is the writing "on" the prints? |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
Pete, the white writing on the N172 & N173s is legitimate and original. The Goodwin photographer wrote on the glass negatives and used the negatives to make the paper photos for the cards. The writing on the negative would in the image. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: ramram
Second generation tintypes also have a loss of focus and, in just about every case, the tintype image is taken from just far enough away to see the entire subject (in this case a cabinet card). That means you distinctly see the edges of the cabinet card within the tintype image. As David mentioned, the image is also reversed and it is also a unique one-of-a-kind image. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay MIller
Pete and David--I think we are getting away from the issue at hand. First, David we are not talking about tin types. We are talking about the images that are in American Memorabilias auction, the ones Kevin Struss showed you. There may be a problem with the writing on some tin types but there is no problem with the writing in the images that American Memorabilia has. Pete, you are correct. The player's name, team and position, and the Goodwin copyright were written on to the glass plate negative and when the photo was made from the negative they showed up on the picture. There is nothing wrong with the writing on the American Memorabilia pieces. These pieces were made from authentic period glass plate negatives. Again, the only question is when they were made. David says after the 1880s and I agree with him. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
It would be a whole lot quieter if everyone at least pretended to agreed with me. Just pretending's fine. Then I'd shut up. But each time I promise to myself to drop the issue, someone has to post that Johnny Cochrane or Jack Lalanne thinks my theories are goofy. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Julie
............ |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: What if?
What if the FBI expert and our board expert disagreed on the proofs? Whose expertise should take precedence? Maybe I like our board expert and would then question the qualification of the FBI expert. Just because the person is an FBI expert doesn't make them infallible. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: David Smith
the hub bub is about whether these "proofs" are authentic or not. Some say they are and some say they are not. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
... |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Anthony
FWIW they were at the Hollywood Park show tonite. If you're in the area take a look and draw your own conclusions. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Ambo
Greetings, |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: runscott
They describe the differences between Dags, tintypes, ambrotypes, etc., various plate sizes, and also the processes used to create the Old Judge and other baseball cards that we are discussing here. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
After a 80 something post thread, I think I need a vacation. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Bob Lemke
Please allow it to sink in that the items being discussed are NOT tintypes. They are photographic prints. For those new to the thread, the discussion is whether the prints were made within hours, days or months of the original glass-plate negative, or years or decades later. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: John Freeman
I looked at the card that was offered by Robert Edward auctions in March of 2001. I have never physically held the item in the auction, but it is not "virtually identical" to the cabinets that American Memorabilia has. First the one in the Robert Edward auciton has advertising in the photo reading "PH Mayo & Brother Tobacco Co." Also the mount that it is on is much different than cards in the American Memorablia auction. Just because the photo contains "Goodwin & Co." advertising does not make them "virtually identical." There are hundreds of generic cabinets out there that made use of Goodwin and Company photos. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Julie
which will set you back $80. And you can look at all your early cards and photos and see if they're period or not. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Bob--To echo what John has said the item from the Robert Edwards auction is not the same as the American Memorabilia lots. Second, a photographic expert already examined the American Memorabilia lots and said they are not period. That should be the end of the story. The RE Auction card could not have been from the Vermont find. It was supposedly mailed to Nebraska. The other material came out of a basement in Vermont. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
I've talked to Julie a good number of times and I've long known that Julie is no dummy and does her homework. I also know she owns her own super power microscope that she was used to examine her MastroNet winnings. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Julie
Boy, was I shocked when I looked at Scott Forrest's beautiful Old Judge reprints under 60X and saw symmetrical pink and green dots! |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
As I said earlier, it is fine with me if collectors bid as much as they want on American Memorablia's or any other proofs (Hip Hip Hooray! and all that stuff). But, unless suffering from abnormally low i.q., the collector's level of knowledge is his choice and his responsibility. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
"A fool and his money are soon seperated..." |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Gary B.
who does not yet own one 19th century baseball item, I would certainly stay far away from an auction like this, if for no other reason than all the controversy. My money hasn't stretched far enough to include many vintage cards as of late, so esepecially for that reason, I would always want to make sure I was getting some kind of good deal and be buying something legitimate. It's so hard to say what's really going on here, as I'm so far from being an expert, and others who are have spoken in volumes here, but it would leave enough doubt in my mind that I wouldn't touch these "proofs" with a 10-foot pole. I certainly hope that whomever does buy these doesn't pay too much, and doesn't later live to regret it. Even as someone who can offer nothing close to a valid opinoin on the matter, and couldn't afford these even if he was interested, still I find the subject and the debate quite fascinating. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: hankron
... |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Can I please see a scan of her bat in left hand pose? |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Rich Jacobs
No you can't, Jay. That's already taken, since it was Farrah Fawcett's pose in the T206 "The Monster." |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Jay Miller
Rich--Welcome back! How about the Bat at ready, by head pose or the famous Silver(Larry) Flint pose Stooping, hands waist high, mask. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Julie Vognar
even those of us you consider idiots... |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Seth Nagdeman
SOME HISTORY OF THESE PROOFS: I compared my scans of these pictures with the ones offered at American Memorabilia and they are identical - these are the same pieces I had in my collection from 1999-2004. I purchased them in December of 1999 for $1,500 from a seller on ebay from Florida: ebay id "vtholstein0esl". They were in a frame. The photos were mounted on a black background. I took them to a framer and he cut them down to cabinet card size - I thought they looked more desireable that way. I decided not to put them in the 19thCenturyOnly.com auction because I did not know enough to represent them in my auction. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Old Judge Proofs?
Posted By: Hal Lewis
Thank you for a VERY informative bit of data! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Old Judge Proofs? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 11-07-2006 10:17 AM |
The 'Old Judge Proofs' | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 01-15-2004 12:36 PM |
Old Judge "Proofs" | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 12-12-2003 06:53 AM |
N-167 Old Judge Proofs | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 10 | 08-10-2003 10:06 AM |
Old Judge proofs | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 07-06-2003 05:32 PM |