Knickerbocker Photo (Update)

[drcy]

A thing is-- beyond the images of the people--, you can get definitive opinions about the age of the photo itself. There are many experts who would look at it in person and be able to tell you the age.

I can assure you that the photo is not old enough to be legitimate for the players you say are in the image. However, there's no requirement to rely on what I say. There are all sorts of photo experts out there-- many who know nothing about baseball-- who can tell you about the age of the photo itself.

[SteveS]

drcy, thus far, everyone who has seen the stereoview has done so in an e-mail or posted on this board. I totally agree that it's much better to have an in-person view. Unfortunately, I now live in a very small town and it's difficult for me to bring it to experts in person and I'm obviously reluctant to send the original around to various places. But believe me, at some point after I can actually determine which experts' opinions would be considered infallible, I will endeavor to have them see it in person.

After the earlier discussion on the date of the stereoview, I sent an e-mail to the American Antiquarian Society. They have a very large collection of stereoviews and are considered to be experts in dating. The person who responded said that their collection contains stereoviews from the latter-half of the 19th century, and as she felt mine was earlier referred me to the Worcester Art Museum for a more precise date. That museum is coincidentally having an exhibit of historic baseball photos. So I wrote to them. In another nice coincidence, the response came a few minutes ago in the same batch of e-mails that included the notification of your post above. The curator of that museum says that it is her opinion that the stereoview dates to the "mid- nineteenth century." While that is not specific, I would consider that to be 1850s-1860s. I don't think that the 1870s qualify as "mid- nineteenth century."

That said, I am curious about something. If it can ever be determined to your satisfaction that the date of the stereoview can indeed be justifiable to contain Knickerbockers, are you also contending that it would be impossible for even one Knickerbocker to be depicted? Have you looked at all six men closely enough to say with 100% certainty that individually, all six are excluded? As I have said numerous times in this thread, I have reviewed the IDs in every way possible. I am very confident in them. But if someone can prove that a better match exists, or that one or some of the matches seem accurate but others don't, I'm certainly willing to listen.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by drcy

A thing is-- beyond the images of the people--, you can get definitive opinions about the age of the photo itself. There are many experts who would look at it in person and be able to tell you the age.

I can assure you that the photo is not old enough to be legitimate for the players you say are in the image. However, there's no requirement to rely on what I say. There are all sorts of photo experts out there-- many who know nothing about baseball-- who can tell you about the age of the photo itself.

David, I've seen you on here for many years and know somewhat of your knowledge and expertise, no disputing you're one of the good guys. So please don't take my question the wrong way as trying to be snarky or sarcastic, I honestly don't know the answer and would like to find out something.

It has been said by some on this thread that what appears to be the biggest knock against the claim that Steve's photo is of Knickerbocker players is the stereoview and photo itself, and that it is not from the correct period. And therefore, based on the seeming ages of the players in the photo, cannot be the Knickerbocker players Steve alleges they may be. Have I stated that correctly?

Assuming so, my question is if it is possible that even if the steroview does turn out to have been created later on in the 1870's and not the 1860's or earlier, could it have been made using a photo or negative from a much earlier time, say 10-15 years earlier, which could then explain the seeming age disparity?

I'm not asking the likelihood, just is it possible. If possible, I would assume that likelihood would be extremely small, at best. Just trying to see if there is a 100% conclusive determination that can be made based on the stereoview and perceived ages of the men in the photo. Thanks.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by BobC

David, I've seen you on here for many years and know somewhat of your knowledge and expertise, no disputing you're one of the good guys. So please don't take my question the wrong way as trying to be snarky or sarcastic, I honestly don't know the answer and would like to find out something.

It has been said by some on this thread that what appears to be the biggest knock against the claim that Steve's photo is of Knickerbocker players is the stereoview and photo itself, and that it is not from the correct period. And therefore, based on the seeming ages of the players in the photo, cannot be the Knickerbocker players Steve alleges they may be. Have I stated that correctly?

Assuming so, my question is if it is possible that even if the steroview does turn out to have been created later on in the 1870's and not the 1860's or earlier, could it have been made using a photo or negative from a much earlier time, say 10-15 years earlier, which could then explain the seeming age disparity?

I'm not asking the likelihood, just is it possible. If possible, I would assume that likelihood would be extremely small, at best. Just trying to see if there is a 100% conclusive determination that can be made based on the stereoview and perceived ages of the men in the photo. Thanks.

The photographic prints appear first generation, so I assume not.

Realize that a stereoview or other photograph from the 1850s (Which it would have to be about from) is very, very early photography. The very first photograph was made in 1839. That REA Knickerbockers is a salt print, a process that was invented before albumen and one of 2 or 3 baseball salt prints known to exist. An 1850s photograph is going to be very distinct. I often compare photograph history to automobile history. A 1910 card is going to be very different in many and obvious ways from a 1930s or 1940s car.

Also note that the earlier the photo, the different the material. One way cabinet cards, CDVs and stereoviews are dated are by the thickness of the mount.