Brooklyn CDV

[dell webb]

Nice work....I'm out!

[smokelessjoe]

Oh Man, Oh Man Chris!

Very intriguing.... The distance change of the lines from the heads.... Cannot believe this was not looked at before?

[bmarlowe1]

Nice work Chris. One possible explanation is that there were 2 negatives from a stereo pair. That could account for the small differences in alignment of the panels with respect to the heads.

[teetwoohsix]

Whoa !!

Awesome work Chris !!!

Sincerely, Clayton

[oldjudge]

Mark-could this also mean that this is a photograph of the LOC photograph and the camera was not aligned perfectly?

[smokelessjoe]

Mark,

You & I looked at some cabinet photo a year or two ago.... It was a similar situation... Almost everything was exact except for one guys arm had moved??? Cannot recall - Maybe a Yale or Havard team shot...

[oldjudge]

Shawn--are you thinking of the Chicago Photographic Studio image of the Chicago team? That was definitely two different negatives.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Mark-could this also mean that this is a photograph of the LOC photograph and the camera was not aligned perfectly?

I don't think so - I don't see how that could cause what we are seeing. Being that not one of these guys appears to have budged, a stereo pair seems like a good explanation. That would mean that the Saco photo is from a different negative than the LoC photo.

Shawn - I remember that also - but in that one someone had clearly moved.

I do have some glasses for viewing stereo images that works with images on a computer screen. I won't be able to try that until tonight. The LoC photo goes on the left. There is probably a bit of spatial distortion in the scans we have, so even if these are a stereo pair, the 3-D effect may not be too good.

[smokelessjoe]

Ahhhh.... I remember the Chicago photo now... I think I am thinking of another one though... Yale or Harvard?

I am curious about the mans foot - the foot to the farthest right of the photo... Is it moving or is that just an angle deal?

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by smokelessjoe

Ahhhh.... I remember the Chicago photo now... I think I am thinking of another one though... Yale or Harvard?

I am curious about the mans foot - the foot to the farthest right of the photo... Is it moving or is that just an angle deal?

I think it is angle. If we could see the carpet pattern in the Saco photo better, it would probably appear to be moving a bit.

[smokelessjoe]

Gotcha, thank you Mark

[Runscott]

...

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Also you talk about taking a sample would damage it. I just compered the photos from ebay to in the holder and there's more damage to the upper left corner now then there use to be.

Isn't this kind of a big deal? If nothing else it provides a newly-damaged area that could be tested - it looks like a bit of the albumen image is now missing, so perhaps some of the binder is exposed.

[smokelessjoe]

You are correct Scott and that would be true for you as well. Glad you brought that up & clarified.

[Runscott]

...

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Nice work Chris. One possible explanation is that there were 2 negatives from a stereo pair. That could account for the small differences in alignment of the panels with respect to the heads.

Three questions:

1. Would the extremely slight variation in the negatives create the desired 3-D effect?

2. Is it reasonably plausible that the photographic process would generate negatives that vary so much in resolution?

3. Why would the studio select the clearly inferior negative to print the CdV?

[Runscott]

Even if there were two negatives, the same resolution questions exist as before.

It's also interesting that there might be a stereoview card of this image out there somewhere.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Three questions:

1. Would the extremely slight variation in the negatives create the desired 3-D effect?

2. Is it reasonably plausible that the photographic process would generate negatives that vary so much in resolution?

3. Why would the studio select the clearly inferior negative to print the CdV?

1) If you look back at post 298, just to the right of Dickie Pearce's head (he is 3rd from left), you can see that in one photo the background panel line clearly misses his head, but in the other it touches his head. I am not a photographic expert, but I don't know what what kind of negative variation could cause that. That difference is completely consistent with what one would see with a stereo pair.

2) Really I don't know. I am not sure if the apparent lo-res of the scan of the Saco River item is due to the fading (loss of contrast). I would not try to argue it either way.

3) No reason I can think of.

[bmarlowe1]

Absolutely 100% 3-D. Very cool.

I will post a side-by-side. Those with viewers can perhaps try to work with it directly off the screen.

[jhs5120]

Wow.

Well, I'm glad that this argument has finally been settled. Kudos to Troy for keeping his composure during this ridiculous witch hunt and shame on the few (you know who you are) for nit-picking his efforts. I understand skepticism, I'm a CPA and professional skepticism pays the bills, but this thread quickly turned into an embarrassment to the hobby.

Troy, good luck with the auction. I hope it hits six figures (I'm not holding my breath though).

[bmarlowe1]

Some people have trouble seeing 3-D, others don't. I am somewhere in the middle. I have to have the image size on the screen just right, the viewing glasses the right distance from the screen, and my face just the right distance from the glasses in order for the 2 images to superimpose into one.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Some people have trouble seeing 3-D, others don't. I am somewhere in the middle. I have to have the image size on the screen just right, the viewing glasses the right distance from the screen, and my face just the right distance from the glasses in order for the 2 images to superimpose into one.

Very cool - I don't even need the 3-D glasses. Just cross your eyes like you do with the 'magic eye' images. It takes a little bit longer, but works fine.

Given the fact that this was the 'other half' of a stereo view, and the image does not exist elsewhere, I don't see how it could possibly not be authentic.

[atx840]

It most definitely is a stereoscope image. This may bother some peoples eyes.

[oldjudge]

Jason-the real embarrassment of the hobby is that people don't do their own research and become easy marks for crooks. This thread has thus far brought out many interesting points but, I believe, has not yet answered the basic question as to whether the CdV is period. With Chris's good work we have established that there were probably two negatives from this shoot. The SRA image thus is from a different negative than the LOC image. However, that still doesn't say whether it is period or a second generation photograph of this image, or an image from another source, later attached to the Williamson mount(the glue to the right of the photo still makes this a viable Henry). I hope you are not embarrassed by asking questions when doing audits, if you do those.

[mrvster]

Thats wild looking

[Runscott]

Jay, very good points. But even if it turns out it's a later image that was affixed to a used Williamson mount, given that Paul Messier feels almost certain it's 19th century, it seems very unlikely that it would be a late 19th century 2nd generation image - that would mean that someone had access to the original image for 25+ years, then made a copy, glued it to an 1865-75 cdv mount (correct period, by the correct photography studio), and then threw away the original image. Unless the original image was trashed and they were creating a replacement.

And if it really is a ca. 1870 image, but was made from a photo (as opposed to a negative), it's unlikely that anyone will be able to tell the difference due to the blurry vignette image and the fact that it would still be 140+ years old.

The other alternative is that it's a modern albumen that looks just like an 1870's one, but was made from an image that no one has ever seen before - probably the least likely scenario of all.

[boneheadandrube]

Are stereoscope photo's albumen? Could an original S-Scope photo (right or left side and removed carefully) have been found and put on a Williamson CdV? Maybe why it doesn't fit the mount? I don't know anything about these super early baseball objects, but I have viewed many s-scopes, and was just wondering?
GB

[barrysloate]

One thing I've always wondered is how late after the fact might a studio reproduce a photo? Is it possible someone could have approached them in 1885 and said, I had an uncle who played on the 1865 Atlantics, could you produce an accurate copy of the team? In some cases, if the studio were still in business, could they have made a very good reproduction to order?

[Saco River Auction]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to show you another cool item in the same sale as the CDV. It is a 1888 Dartmouth Football team cabinet photo featuring Cincinnati Major League Pitcher Leon Viau, beautifully framed and matted 17x13 in frame. He also played for the Cleveland Spiders, Louisville Colonels and Boston Beaneaters.

Troy

[ullmandds]

Nice...love those BIG D shirts...and the stocking hats!!!!1

[bigfish]

Nice picture. Are those sleeping caps?

[ScottFandango]

was REA given a crack at selling this?

[mcadams]

1) One thing NOT emphasized much on this thread was anyone's views of Lelands. I don't know how you could read all of the posts here and not have a slighly lowered opinion of the team there. I get that no one is perfect, but the opinions offered by Lelands staff as to why they chose not to accept the item appear to be somewhat comical at this point, especially in light Messier's comments.

2) Troy- I wish all Auction Houses were as responsive as you were. Your efforts are to be applauded.

3) Troy- There was some particularly good advice here that you brushed aside. There was a path toward an A+ job, but you didn't go there for some reason. It was clear that no one here agreed that damage was even remotely possible with forensic testing on the mount. Had you taken that step, you could have really created a magnificent reputation for this item and your increased the prestige of your auction house going forward.

4) Troy- I think Leon was trying to provide some helpful advice regarding re-gluing SGC holders (We don't do that....ever.) While he was trying to be helpful, you got very defensive, and in my opinion lacked a little professionalism in your response. The collector's here, like you, want the auction to generate great results. No need to take everything so personally.

5) I am VERY curious to see how REA, Bill Goodwin, SCP, Greg Bussineau, or others would respond if they were asked to take a similar item to Messier etc. for further authentication after it had been slabbed. I hope Troy's persistence was widely noticed and has set a new standard for Auction House responsiveness.

[Saco River Auction]

The card is at SGC being put in a new holder. It will be back on Weds January 30th.

Troy

[mikemcgrail]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Wow.

Well, I'm glad that this argument has finally been settled. Kudos to Troy for keeping his composure during this ridiculous witch hunt and shame on the few (you know who you are) for nit-picking his efforts. I understand skepticism, I'm a CPA and professional skepticism pays the bills, but this thread quickly turned into an embarrassment to the hobby.

Troy, good luck with the auction. I hope it hits six figures (I'm not holding my breath though).

I have just worked my way thru this entire thread. Great stuff and lots of information from many of you!!

I must have missed the "embarrassment to the hobby" stuff Jason. All I encountered were things that I feel make the hobby better and more transparent.

Mike McGrail

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by mikemcgrail

I have just worked my way thru this entire thread. Great stuff and lots of information from many of you!!

I must have missed the "embarrassment to the hobby" stuff Jason. All I encountered were things that I feel make the hobby better and more transparent.

Mike McGrail

+1

I think it was one of the most useful threads we've had here in a long time. We were able to learn quite a bit about what's important to collectors when it comes to risk and protecting the integrity of the hobby, and that it varies greatly among collectors. It was also interesting to find out how knowledgeable about albumens some board members are (and surprisingly in some cases, aren't). I made some good contacts and reinforced others - personally, I loved it.

It was also very interesting to learn more about authentication options, where the expertise is and where people think it might be. We also saw a very wide range of collector expectations when it comes to auction houses.

It was refreshing to see Troy be so forthright and passionate with his responses - most auction houses wouldn't have been. Even though I disagree with him on many points, at least he participated.

[smokelessjoe]

I will be bidding on this one.... Just a fair warning!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/First-Baseba...item257a70e353

[packs]

Pretty speedy reprint.

[oldjudge]

It's a slow time for a Steeler fan. What better thing to do than photocopy a few images and make some "reprints".

[Runscott]

.............

[MW1]

I find the following statements from Saco Auctions to be confusing:

The card was found a couple of months ago by an antiques picker in Baileyville, a town of about 1,700 people in rural Washington County. The picker stopped at a yard sale in search of furniture, but found none. Instead, the people who were having the yard sale brought the picker to a woodshed, where he found some old Coca-Cola bottles and a photo album, Thibodeau said. Inside the album was the card, which shows 10 stone-faced baseball players, some with bats in hand. It’s a carte de visite, a type of small photograph usually made of thin albumen print and mounted on a thicker piece of paper. Hartford said the picker, who does not want to be publicly identified, sent it to Saco River Auctions because he had heard about the King Kelly card auction. “It came to us out of the blue,” Hartford said. Source: http://www.pressherald.com/life/1865...r-auction.html


Then we have the following from the New York Post:

The seller, whose name was withheld for privacy purposes, happened to find the card by chance after he purchased a photo album, several old Coke bottles and a couple of oak chairs for under $100 at the yard sale. The card was found inside the photo album and the man mailed it to Saco River Auction. Source: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...zkRWQuj6BWdLNI


According to NPR (quoting the NYP), however, the picker mentioned in the original story, was actually Floyd Hartford, the owner of Saco Auctions:

The New York Post reports that a 148-year-old Brooklyn Atlantics baseball card was discovered late last year in a photo album Floyd Hartford purchased among other things at a yard sale. Source: http://www.wbur.org/npr/171286526/ga...-auction-block

[atx840]

HOS

"UPDATE Saturday Feb. 9: In a report published by NPR after the sale of the Brooklyn Atlantics CDV on Wednesday, writer Tanya Ballard Brown identified Saco River Auctions auctioneer, Floyd Hartford as the anonymous “antique picker” who originally discovered the rare cdv at a yard sale"

[Runscott]

Saco sure has been lucky as of late.

That's some good pickins.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I thought it was on eBay originally. Maybe the NPR story is wrong.

[Matthew H]

I find it hard to believe that the owner of SRA was picking yard sales, which is usually a waste of time.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

I find it hard to believe that the owner of SRA was picking yard sales, which is usually a waste of time.

Matt, I think that was a reporting mistake. It's more likely that pickers are simply finding very rare 19th century albumens, all over that area, and are all bringing them to Saco. I can't wait to see what they find next.

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Matt, I think that was a reporting mistake. It's more likely that pickers are simply finding very rare 19th century albumens, all over that area, and are all bringing them to Saco. I can't wait to see what they find next.

I guess yard sales in Maine are hot right now.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

...
However, that still doesn't say whether it is period or a second generation photograph of this image, or an image from another source, later attached to the Williamson mount(the glue to the right of the photo still makes this a viable Henry).
...

Now that the auction is over and Saco got $92K (close enough to the 6 digits they hoped for), I think it's safe for us to say what we REALLY think it is.

I will start by saying that testing the binder would probably have been a waste of time. I'll show you why later, but I'll start by saying that I purchased these two cheap cdv's that Haulsofshame shows on their website (Nash's story, which is interesting, though typically biased: http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=16333

It's actually two cdv's, not one. The one on the left does not have a backstamp, and the one on the right does not have a front stamp, so don't worry - I won't be creating a 'Frankenstein' from them. But I DID perform a simple test and will show the results in a moment. Some of us stated previously why testing the binder in the Brooklyn Atlantics cdv was important. Now I'll show you why even that isn't enough. But read Nash's blog first, and think about it. I have no idea if his 'conspiracy theory' is correct, but the important thing to ask (and we asked this previously in this thread, long before Nash pilfered our thoughts) is: "is it possible?" And if it's possible, is there financial incentive for someone to attempt it? Because if there is, they will.

Here are the two original cdv's. Unfortunately, I didn't scan the other sides of them, but this should be sufficient.

[Runscott]

I'll leave this up for a while, giving people who have any interest, a little time to think about it, then I'll describe and post scans, of the test results. I alluded to it in last night's thread regarding the Horner Wagner, but now the test subjects are 'stable', so I can scan them.

Edited: I'm not going to bump this thread, but here are my thoughts on what this item is.

I believe that it is either a prototype of some sort, or it's what Nash hypothesized, but I lean toward the former - Williamson was a professional and would not have distributed something of this quality as a final product: the image does not match the mount, and the mount is re-used. These are actually facts that you would have to be blind not to see.

It could be a prototype for something similar to the 'ticket photo' of Wright, that's coming up in REA's auction. As such, it could have been presented to a representative of the Atlantics (at their request after a team photo sitting, or on Williamson's initiative), the possibilities for use described to the representative, and then the idea fizzled. The loc item, also 1-of-a-kind might be another 'prototype' item that was created by Williamson at the same time. In other words, he was experimenting. There is another possibility, based on the fact that the two images work together as stereoview components, that I won't address yet.

Yes, other than the fact that it's poorly constructed, it looks like a normal carte-de-visite. But it does feature a baseball team, and hobbyists are well aware that many (most?) such items (team baseball cdv's) were actually used as advertising, as opposed to the cabinet and imperial-size team photos that were distributed to team members. Size is key here.

That's it for now. I have at least two additional tests to run, but I have decided to limit their distribution to a very short list of interested email recipients. Everyone else can put their blinders back on.

[drc]

I don't know. Those babies sure do resemble the Mathewson brothers.