Incredible Baseball Tintype Auction Yesterday

bmarlowe1 · #1 07-06-2020, 08:26 AM

Hi Corey,

1) It is well known that ears change little from young teens (or some say even younger) until old age (some say age 60, some say aged 70 at which point lobe droop may accelerate for some). Ears are not autographs.

2) I am comparing horizontal ear location, not vertical ear location to which your argument does apply.

3) I am not arguing about the distinctiveness of the shallow below the lower lip but it's location which is considered to be a key identifying factor.

There are quite a few known images of Anson, all of which as far as I know do not have these problems.

benjulmag · #2 07-06-2020, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Hi Corey,

1) It is well known that ears change little from young teens (or some say even younger) until old age (some say age 60, some say aged 70 at which point lobe droop may accelerate for some). Ears are not autographs.

2) I am comparing horizontal ear location, not vertical ear location to which your argument does apply.

3) I am not arguing about the distinctiveness of the shallow below the lower lip but it's location which is considered to be a key identifying factor.

There are quite a few known images of Anson, all of which as far as I know do not have these problems.

Mark,

As I said we are going to agree to disagree. I disagree with your view how ears can change over time. And I do not believe you fully understand how light and photographic process can impact facial comparisons. I respect that you see differences; rarely does one not when comparing two images. But I vigorously disagree that scientifically the tintype can be proven not to depict Anson, as you claim. That type of conclusion is very much the exception when one does comparisons of faces that resemble each other. My view, and my view only, is that you present but one factor of many, and when one weighs it against the plethora of others consistent with it being Anson, I am comfortable it is.

bmarlowe1 · #3 07-06-2020, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Mark,

As I said we are going to agree to disagree. I disagree with your view how ears can change over time. And I do not believe you fully understand how light and photographic process can impact facial comparisons. I respect that you see differences; rarely does one not when comparing two images. But I vigorously disagree that scientifically the tintype can be proven not to depict Anson, as you claim. That type of conclusion is very much the exception when one does comparisons of faces that resemble each other. My view, and my view only, is that you present but one factor of many, and when one weighs it against the plethora of others consistent with it being Anson, I am comfortable it is.

Hope all is well with you. My view as to how little ears change is based on the scientific literature on the subject and experience comparing at least few thousand photos over the years and seeing results that are consistent with that literature.

benjulmag · #4 07-06-2020, 02:21 PM

Mark,

We have a difference of opinion on this issue. My statements are based directly on what Jerry Richards, the expert I hired to do the Knickerbocker analysis and with whom you spoke at its conclusion, told me. Mr. Richards hasn't seen a few thousand photographs over the years; he has seen tens of thousands, and is as respected an expert in facial ID based on photographic analysis as exists. This was his profession for close to half a century. His conclusions about how ears can and often do change differ from yours, something he told me after he spoke with you. He also stressed to me ad nauseum the margin of error in doing photo ID based on images taken years apart under different photographic processes and under unknown lighting conditions, and that much more often than not the results are inconclusive.

So there is no misunderstanding as to what I am saying, I do not believe your analysis, taking into account how certain facial features can change over time, coupled with the margin of measurement error caused by photographic process, resolution, lighting, changes in appearance during different photographic poses, proves the person in the tintype is not Anson. And that unless it can, other factors can and should be legitimately considered, which when I do make me comfortable Anson is depicted in the tintype.

bmarlowe1 · #5 07-06-2020, 02:32 PM

The very same Jerry Richards appeared on an episode of a memorabilia show on the history channel and quickly concluded that a photo of an old man could not depict Jesse James because the ear did not match that in a photo of a young Jesse James.

Forensic professionals can be hired to either tell you what they think or to take a side (like a lawyer). The arguments you made, in my view, are kind of boiler plate when the photo details aren't supportive of your point of view. Also they presume that I have no aptitude for visualizing how the appearance of complex 3-D objects are affected by lighting and shadow. As to aptitude, I think I have proven otherwise. My first career choice was commercial art and I did take lessons.

>>taking into account how certain facial features can change over time, coupled with the margin of measurement error caused by photographic process, resolution, lighting, changes in appearance during different photographic poses,...

So, if pose, shadow and unspecified distortion can so easily fool the eye, couldn't that make someone who is not Anson look like Anson?

perezfan · #6 07-06-2020, 03:18 PM

What I would love to see is a photo of the earliest known Cap Anson, compared to those taken of him 20 - 25 years later. Using similar grid lines and the same analytic techniques, it would be interesting to see how the comparison (young vs. old) stacks up.

I can definitely see how the angle of the camera and the differing lighting conditions could produce results that are not exactly "apples to apples".

And it does not need to be limited to Anson... it would be interesting to see how these same comparative techniques stack up for any well-known player (with the initial image being from the player's teens, and the final image being from his early 40s).

As for the comparison at hand, I believe Anson's most defining feature is his deeply inset eyes and protruding brow. The photo from the tintype does not seem to confirm or deny this trait, but I would not be too surprised it it is indeed him. Either way... a very interesting debate!

oldjudge · #7 07-06-2020, 03:33 PM

Mark is the preeminent facial recognition expert in th hobby. I am glad that his opinion coincides with mine, or else I would just assume I was wrong. The good news is that this photograph will probably remain in Coreys collection for a long time and he can call the kid in the image anyone he wants.
JC-You still want to buy it?

benjulmag · #8 07-06-2020, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

The very same Jerry Richards appeared on an episode of a memorabilia show on the history channel and quickly concluded that a photo of an old man could not depict Jesse James because the ear did not match that in a photo of a young Jesse James.

Forensic professionals can be hired to either tell you what they think or to take a side (like a lawyer). The arguments you made, in my view, are kind of boiler plate when the photo details aren't supportive of your point of view. Also they presume that I have no aptitude for visualizing how the appearance of complex 3-D objects are affected by lighting and shadow. As to aptitude, I think I have proven otherwise. My first career choice was commercial art and I did take lessons.

>>taking into account how certain facial features can change over time, coupled with the margin of measurement error caused by photographic process, resolution, lighting, changes in appearance during different photographic poses,...

So, if pose, shadow and unspecified distortion can so easily fool the eye, couldn't that make someone who is not Anson look like Anson?

Jerry Richards was hired to tell me what he thought without any skewing of his opinion. In regard to another item on which I hired him to opine, he told me that one was not what it was represented to be. He also told me with respect to the item for which he supported my conclusion that had he collected that sort of thing he would have bought it. It is my view he was being honest when telling me this.

Photography as applied to photo ID is very different than art applied to photo ID. IMO a background in one does not give one expertise in the other.

And yes, just as factors that can make one appear not to be someone he/she is, those same factors can make someone appear to be someone he/she is not. My point is that there is uncertainty when one does this kind of photographic comparison, and the results typically are not either "it is" or "it isn't", but scales of probability in between that then invite one to consider other factors. That is all I have ever said about this comparison. You are the one making the absolute statement of a definite conclusion, that respectfully I do not agree with.

bmarlowe1 · #9 07-06-2020, 11:39 PM

>> but scales of probability in between that then invite one to consider other factors...

My understanding has been that the guy holding the ball in these earlier 19thC team photos is THE pitcher (or maybe I should say "probably" the pitcher.) Your "Anson" is holding the ball and I can only find mention of him playing 2nd base at Marshaltown. I can't find mention of him being the team's pitcher, though my 10 minutes of research has not been exhaustive. So how does does this factor into your probabilities?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1954 Topps PSA 8 PWCC auction yesterday	1952boyntoncollector	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	0	03-24-2016 08:06 AM
Babe Ruth 100th Anniversary Auction Open For Bidding...Incredible Game used and Autos	Goldin Auctions	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	1	06-18-2014 10:48 AM
Very Early Baseball Player Tintype Image- auction	Leon	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	18	09-05-2013 07:45 PM
Incredible May Heritage Auction OPEN	joeadcock	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	22	04-09-2013 04:45 PM
Incredible! If you like baseball...	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	13	06-25-2008 11:20 AM