|
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
It looks to me like the photo is real, but I bet it was mounted later so that it could be preserved in a newspaper archive (possibly even in 1925). So I bet it is not a "cabinet" but an original photo mounted on thicker cardboard. Notice the dots at the top, seems to look like a recycled piece of newspaper art board to me. As such I think $4,400 is probably at the top of the market but still a really cool piece. I am glad I didn't see it, I would have lost by about 2 grand and then been mad!
__________________
Be sure to check out my site www.RMYAuctions.com |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
See my comment above
....been there done that. ![]() Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It is very hard for me to tell if I do not have it in hand. The size of the mount is listed as 4-1/4" x 6-1/2" which is right on for a 19th century cabinet mount. Also, the corners looked as though they are rounded by the manufacturing process consistent to cabinet cards. The color of the mount threw me off a little bit and the dot printing at the top and left borders is also peculiar. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Was it a common practice to mount 19th century photos years later as a way to preserve them? Seems like there would be better ways to preserve.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nearly all 1800s photos were mounted. Early 1900s photos could come either way.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Right, but was it common to take a late 1800's unmounted photo and mount it in the 1920's as a way to preserve it?
Last edited by Bicem; 10-06-2016 at 11:06 PM. |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
No.
Offhand, I can't think of an 1800s baseball paper photo that wasn't originally mounted. There are 'skinned' and remounted photos, but those are rare. Culver put original prints on manilla mounts years later, but those are 1900s photos. For the record, if the Delehanty is indeed mounted (I can't tell for sure from the pic. When I first looked at it I thought that might have been the white borders), I don't see anything errant with the mount. If it's mounted I don't know why people would say that's not an 1898 mount. Last edited by drcy; 10-07-2016 at 02:29 AM. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
They might say it isn't a correct mount as it has no identifier for the photographer AND those pesky dots on the front at the top.....Both of those observations leave questions to me.
Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Did I miss something?? | 53Browns | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 03-26-2016 12:32 PM |
| So, what did I miss? | npa589 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 34 | 01-28-2015 01:39 PM |
| UGH - how did i miss this | EvilKing00 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 01-26-2013 09:14 PM |
| DID I MISS SOMETHING HERE ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 05-05-2008 03:02 PM |
| Don't Miss This One!!!!! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 09-16-2002 11:52 AM |