California Photographer CDV - Late 1870s?

[khkco4bls]

Leon according to the ring bat 1880s. Can u read the label on the bat

[Leon]

Originally Posted by khkco4bls

Leon according to the ring bat 1880s. Can u read the label on the bat

Thanks Kevin. No, I can't read the label on the bat even with a huge scan. I thought maybe late 1870s because of the bibs, but I got this from Scott F. and I think (but am not sure) he had it listed as 1880. Maybe circa 1880 would be good?

According to this website in the late 1870's/early 1880's, the photographer for MH Grant studios in Eureka, California was Amassa Flaglor.

https://library.humboldt.edu/humco/h...ricsonNews.htm

Here's Flaglor bio:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Nne...page&q&f=false

Seems Flaglor was in Eureka 1871-1880, then moved to San Francisco. Don't find any record of MH Grant studios after 1882 in Eureka. But records are incomplete.

[slidekellyslide]

c1880 is probably as good as you can get...could certainly be late 1870s, but almost certainly is not later than 1885. I have had photos of players in bib uniforms as late as the 1890s, but this certainly looks circa 1880.

Went to Library of Congress Newspaper Archives and searched "Eureka Baseball", years 1875-1885. There are seven articles on the Eureka Baseball Club, all from a Sacramento paper, all in 1883:

Here's one:
http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lc...arRange&page=1

Strange there were no articles pre-1883, but Dan's right ca. 1880 is probably as close as possible. It's a great looking image. Hope that helps, enjoy the rest of National Love Your Pet Day.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Leon

Thanks Kevin. No, I can't read the label on the bat even with a huge scan. I thought maybe late 1870s because of the bibs, but I got this from Scott F. and I think (but am not sure) he had it listed as 1880. Maybe circa 1880 would be good?

I try to be conservative with age guesses, but I really do think circa 1880 is good for this one. We often see age arguments built based on the presence of ring bats, bibs or pillbox hats - I might start a new thread: "Show us your baseball images with bibs, ring bats or pillbox hats, from the 1900's" Some of you would be quite surprised.

I try to start by looking at the qualities of the photo and mount first, then key on the other stuff as support for my first gut reaction - you don't want a bib, ring bat or pillbox hat clouding your judgement. Attaching an age to an old photos is often based on a lot of stuff going on in your brain at a less conscious level - hard to put your finger on it, but you have a gut feel based on the sum of all the knowledge you've accumulated and pieces you've seen. When I see people assertively state that something's from say, 1880, and I have a strong feeling that it's more like 1900, I should probably just keep my opinion to myself - without 'proof', it's all just one collector's knowledge and experience vs another's.

I do remember getting bamboozled by a mount that I was certain was circa 1905, and then I found one from the 1890's in my own collection that could be definitively dated to that period. There are always opportunities to learn.

[drcy]

If I had to pick a decade, I'd pick 1870s. It looks 1870s. The photo style and uniforms are 1870s-stye, which of course doesn't mean it couldn't be say 1880 or 1881.

[barrysloate]

I'll say 1880-85.

[drcy]

Dark shoes are post 1870s style, but they could be wearing work shoes to the studio and the guy in the right back appears to possibly be wearing the 1870s style. The shoes are the only troublesome detail for me. If they were wearing white shoes, they'd I'd be more more firm that it's 1870s. The general rule of thumb is white hightop shoes (with black trim) are 1860s-70s and black/dark brown athletic shoes are 1880-90s. Dark low tops 20th century. The problem is sometimes the players wore their work or dress shoes or are only in their stocking feet as they're in the photography studio-- but they usually wear their athletic shoes because its part of their uniform.

The guy on the front left is wearing dark shoes, but they look like slip on non-athletic shoes. Official athletic shoes were lace up. And it looks as if the shoes on the right front are also not lace up. And, as I said, the guy in the right back appears to be wearing 1870s baseball shoes. So the shoes are the tough part.

As I said, it could be be early 1880s, but my pick of a decade is still 1870s.

Clearly, December 31 1879 and January 1st 1880 weren't far apart, which is why there is a margin of error, or allowances made, when picking a decade. That's why the word 'circa' was invented.

[Runscott]

The guy at front left is wearing a fairly definitive style of shoe - perhaps someone can date them?