![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
I have just read Tim Newcomb's excellent M116 article in Old Cardboard and it has triggered something that may or may not make sense. I e-mailed Tim about it and he has to think on it a bit. Anyway, it goes something like this.... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
Dave, that insight into the Carl Horner images makes some sense to me. Good thinking!!! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
DAVE |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
Isn't the red Cobb portrait card possible in Piedmont 460?? Was that a Carl Horner image?? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kevin
I think the two go together just fine! This proves there is definitely a connection. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
Like I said, it's a theory and more research is required and it likely would only form part of the puzzle if valid. You have the player permissions in the mix and also the American Caramel/Philly connection as well. I'm specifically interested in the use and licensing of the Horner portraits and how those licensing rights (or whatever they would have been called in '09) may have played a role in which players/portraits ended up pulled from T206. I would think there was more than one variety of licensing for varying periods of time. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
FRANK |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
I like this theory a lot. The fact that the majority of the 150 Series cards of the T206 set depict the player's portraits, but then the subsequent 350 and 460 Series depected the action poses, while M116 took over the portraits in 1910 is too great a coincidence to be mere happenstance, in my opinion. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
I like this idea, too. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
Ted, quite right on the Wagner portrait. I wonder if the M116 is also by Horner. Dueling portraits? (I can hear the banjos now....) |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Todd Schultz
Seems to me that Horner portraits were widely used in the Colgan issues that spanned 1909-1913, which would weigh against any SL exclusivity. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Double post |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Here is the complete list of the T206 portraits in the 1st Series issued in 1909. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
Thanks Ted. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
If you are interested, I also have the lists of the portraits of the 350 and 460 Series cards ? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
Ted, not sure as I think the theory is being disproven. Here's what I found using the Classic Baseball Cards book for M116 and VCP for T206. The matches from Ted's list above (asterisks mean I am 99% certain it's a match) are: |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
A portrait pose would have been a more traditional pose 100 years ago. That could be why many of the 150 series cards are portraits. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
T206 DRUM's....and their "A-B-C-D connection" | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 105 | 06-30-2008 08:39 AM |
Help with Vintage Photo - St Louis connection? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 11-10-2007 12:19 PM |
Never made this connection before... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 08-17-2006 04:39 AM |
Big Eaters/Zeenut connection? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 05-26-2005 07:20 AM |
Vintage connection in today's game | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 03-13-2005 12:06 PM |