|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well-said Steve.
Most of the greatest photos taken in the early 1900's were not of famous plays, but rather of famous players. The cameraman set up to maximize his chance for success, but we've all done that and ended up with garbage. In today's age of iphone photos, many people forget the time that was spent setting up a shot - lighting, depth-of-field, etc. for a roll of film that gave you 24 or 36 shots and you had to wait a while to get the prints back, and then you had to hope they didn't screw them up. If you look up what Ansel Adams did to set up a shot you'll get the extreme version, but a Charles Conlon effort was much closer to Adams than it was to a photographer even from the 1970's, much less a millennial with an iphone.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've gotta imagine that there are still some amazingly historic photos out there that will come to the public eye soon, whether it's through private collections or photo morgues...they just gotta...I hope.
That being said, I'd say the Chapman Mays incident is definitely a biggie in terms of significance. I've definitely never seen any shots from that game, but considering there's no shortage of photographs from the 1920 Yankees season (especially because of Ruth), I feel like somebody must have taken a shot of it, Afterall, when the beaning happened, Ruth was sitting on an astounding 42 home runs, and the Yankees were in the middle of a pennant race with Cleveland and the White Sox. So with the former coming to New York for the last time that season, it had to be considered an important series. I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. I bet that photos were taken of the incident, but maybe they're long gone. And that's whether they were never published by any papers, or were and the negatives/prints were trashed at some point. FWIW, I would also LOVE to see an image of Rath getting beaned during the 1919 World Series. What saddens me is that we know that less than twenty years later, having a photograph of the first pitch in the World Series (many times the first pitch for each game) was often done. And, at least by '36 or so, those photographs were often taken from behind home plate with the outfield in clear view. Can you imagine how cool it would have looked to have a photograph like that of Rath facing Cicotte? Even if he got plunked with Eddie's second offering, I just think the significance is insane. Pair that with a photo from the Chapman beaning and you have two of the major hinge points to the coming of Babe Ruth's celebrity. Man, I love this game. And for sh!t sure I'd love to paint either one.
__________________
Check out my baseball artwork: www.graigkreindler.com www.twitter.com/graigkreindler www.facebook.com/graigkreindler |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don’t believe that the absence of any significant, newsworthy moment prior to October 1920, nor their ubiquity after that date, has anything to do with automatic film loading or advancing. I believe it has something to do with technology, but that technology already existed by 1917; there was just no need for it in baseball photography until October 1920. There is something else that created that need.
There was at least one photographer at the Chapman-Mays game, from the New York Daily News. I think it’s likely, however, that he left before the beaning, either because he had what he needed or because he had to meet a deadline for an evening edition. One can never say that no photograph of a historic moment before October 1920 will appear because of the problem of induction, but I think it is extremely unlikely. I tried to comb the Daily News’ photo morgue to see if they had a photograph of Chapman, but couldn’t gain admittance. I’ve been through all of the Daily News’ paper archive for 1920, however, and there was nothing about it, so I doubt it’s there. Last edited by sphere and ash; 09-16-2018 at 09:20 AM. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
I’m re-upping my challenge to this impressive group: that you can’t point to a single, significant moment on the field that was captured photographically prior to October 1920. And that you can’t point to a single, significant moment that was *not* captured after October 1920.
These are pretty extreme statements, and I’m curious to see if they can be refuted. If anyone can do it, it’s this group. Finally, do you care how it came to be? Or is this merely of interest to a tiny handful of photography specialists? |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some of the earlier 3000 hit milestones I dont believe were not chronicled. I cant remember seeing anything on Cobb or Speaker getting theirs in 1921 but I seem to remember seeing Eddie Collins in 1925 but even that might have been an older stock photo used for the event. By contrast, in 1942 when Paul Waner was closing in there were photographers everywhere and his actual 3000th hit was captured at field level. I also dont remember seeing anything from the actual game where GC Alexander got his 300th win in 1924, but by the time Lefty Grove did it it was well documented.
A lot of it had to do with the fact that we put a huge amount of emphasis on these events today but back in the day, I dont think people cared as much. Going back to the 1919 World Series, it is VERY weird that there are more images of the 1918 and 1920 series than 1919. Maybe gamblers got to the newspapers and paid them off too!
__________________
Be sure to check out my site www.RMYAuctions.com |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Significant? I'm not enough of a baseball historian to know. But I did find this photo in the Detroit Free Press from this supposedly well known 1912 incident:
Another major controversy in Cobb's career occurred in 1912, and this led to the first players' strike. During a game in New York on May 15 of that year, Cobb was subjected to vicious and unrelenting heckling from the fans, especially a disabled man named Claude Lueker, who for several years had made sport of heckling Cobb whenever the Tigers visited Hilltop Park. Finally, unable to stand the abuse and urged on by his teammates, Cobb went into the stands and attacked Lueker, who had lost one hand and most of the other in a printing press accident. When he was informed of the incident, Ban Johnson suspended Cobb indefinitely. Despite their dislike for Cobb, his teammates were outraged, and announced that they would not play again until Cobb was reinstated. After a one-game farce in which the Tigers fielded a team of semipro players, the matter was resolved when Cobb's suspension was reduced to ten days. Detroit_Free_Press_Mon__May_20__1912_.jpg Detroit_Free_Press_Mon__May_20__1912_ copy.jpg |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Lueker incident is a great case in point. Thank you for the newspaper image.
What strikes me is that Lueker was attacked on May 15; the newspaper image is five days later. Why didn’t anyone capture Cobb beating Lueker? Where was Charles Conlon that day at Hilltop? Where were others? My “challenge” still stands. |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Online Photography Identification Course | drcy | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 5 | 11-02-2014 04:34 PM |
| WTB A Portrait of Baseball Photography | T206Jim | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 2 | 03-20-2014 07:10 PM |
| WTB: A Portrait of Baseball Photography | ibuysportsephemera | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 9 | 07-22-2013 03:00 PM |
| Sports photography question | billyb | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 36 | 06-06-2013 05:57 PM |
| OT: Photography Help | ibuysportsephemera | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 13 | 09-06-2012 08:05 PM |