1902 Philadelphia Athletics Champions Baseball Team Photo/Composite w Plank Mack Wadd

[Bicem]

1902 composite photo by MacIntire Studios of Philadelphia. Individual cabinet photos using the same images are also known (I used to own the Mack and Waddell).

[Hankphenom]

Wow!

[sb1]

Several of the A's W600's cabinet use the images from this composite, all placed within an oval as the Plank.

[BobC]

i don't know. In looking at the two Plank images side by side there appear, to my eyes at least, to be some very subtle differences between the two photos. Is it not possible these images are from two different photos, just taken at the same photo sitting/session?

[Hankphenom]

Look the same to me.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

Look the same to me.

For example, look at the dip, curl, or whatever you want to call it, just to the right of the part in his hair as you are looking at the photos. Those are clearly not exactly the same. If you look at other aspects of the two photos, for instance the contour/outline of Plank's left cheek, they are again clearly not exactly the same either. Or look at the angles or curves of Plank's shoulders in both photos, again they are not the same. Or look at the eyebrow/shadow over Plank's right eye, the image in one is more rounded, but flatter in the other. And so on.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by BobC

For example, look at the dip, curl, or whatever you want to call it, just to the right of the part in his hair as you are looking at the photos. Those are clearly not exactly the same. If you look at other aspects of the two photos, for instance the contour/outline of Plank's left cheek, they are again clearly not exactly the same either. Or look at the angles or curves of Plank's shoulders in both photos, again they are not the same. Or look at the eyebrow/shadow over Plank's right eye, the image in one is more rounded, but flatter in the other. And so on.

Maybe, but I still think the greater chance is that they are the same, and the perceived differences are a matter of quality of resolution and also of process. For example, if you look at the right shoulder of the photo on the right carefully, you will see that a marker of some kind was used to augment it. I don't know why they would do that, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were other examples, perhaps less obvious examples, of where that photo was touched up, and perhaps the photo on the left also.

[Bicem]

They are the same. Keep in mind one is an actual photo and one is a litho rendering of that photo that can contain changes or enhancements.