1915 Ruth Red Sox Pitching Staff Photo

drcy · #1 10-10-2017, 11:53 PM

I think collectors give too much of value premium on a photo merely because it's a 'rookie year' photo. Just my opinion.

Honestly, I think it's a pretty marginal photo, and people value it highly just because it's an early Ruth.

Bicem · #2 10-11-2017, 12:51 AM

I'd argue rookie photos are underpriced compared to rookie cards. Especially in Ruth's case where his rc is a 1916 issue.

drcy · #3 10-11-2017, 12:57 AM

I was expressing my personal sentiments. Clearly, many bidders disagree.

Bicem · #4 10-11-2017, 01:23 AM

Well stop being wrong David.

drcy · #5 10-11-2017, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicem

Well stop being wrong David.

Considering my favorite Stooge is Shemp, I've been an outlier before.

Snapolit1 · #6 10-11-2017, 06:39 AM

Collecting can sometimes be all about enforcing your rules (and others) and making them the be all and end all. That’s cool. But sometimes the rules are a little nuts.

To use the example Rhys uses in his classification rules, if Conlon took a great Ruth and ran back to his darkroom to develop it it’s a Type 1. But if he prints that Type 1 and notices one of Ruth’s teammates in the background picking his nose, he then takes that dude out of the picture and takes a new picture off the print. Destroying the original. The copy is printed one hour after the original and he signs off on that. The photo is now somehow a $5000 photo and not a $75000 one. Seems pretty arbitrary to me.

Forever Young · #7 10-11-2017, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Collecting can sometimes be all about enforcing your rules (and others) and making them the be all and end all. That�s cool. But sometimes the rules are a little nuts.

To use the example Rhys uses in his classification rules, if Conlon took a great Ruth and ran back to his darkroom to develop it it�s a Type 1. But if he prints that Type 1 and notices one of Ruth�s teammates in the background picking his nose, he then takes that dude out of the picture and takes a new picture off the print. Destroying the original. The copy is printed one hour after the original and he signs off on that. The photo is now somehow a $5000 photo and not a $75000 one. Seems pretty arbitrary to me.

Arbitrary except for a little thing like quality of the photograph/image.

The type 1 examples of this particular subject are off the charts in clarity vs this. There are reasons why Type 1 photos are higher valued and more sought after than later prints or prints of lesser quality. Those who state otherwise typically have not so objective motives.
It is a great vintage piece but not close to the quality of a 1915 type 1 example.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sold Babe Ruth Type I photo, pitching Yankees	bobfreedman	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	09-30-2017 11:08 PM
No LongerAvailable: 1915 PSA/DNA Type I Photo - Babe Ruth (Rookie)	bcbgcbrcb	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	1	08-28-2014 11:51 PM
No Longer Available: 1915 PSA/DNA Type I Photo - Babe Ruth (Rookie)	bcbgcbrcb	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	0	08-26-2014 11:12 AM
WTB -- 1915 Ruth -- Real Photo	LincolnVT	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	0	11-12-2013 07:32 PM
SOLD: Oct 12, 1915 - Babe Ruth Photo - Newspaper - Boston	bcbgcbrcb	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	5	10-01-2011 03:24 PM