1930's Homestead Grays Team Photo

[bcbgcbrcb]

The current Huggins & Scott Auction includes the below item which, based on the item's condition evident in the scans provided, I am nearly 100% sure that I owned at one time. I bought it off of the internet believing it was authentic. Once I had it in hand, I was quite concerned that it was not an original. Thus I submitted it to PSA/DNA for their photo review service and my fears were confirmed. I ended up listing it for sale on e-bay as a reproduction for $15.00 and lost several hundred dollars on the item.

Upon viewing the Huggins & Scott Auction preview online, I immediately called and spoke to Bill Huggins and let him know my thoughts and background on the piece. Bill thanked me and indicated that he would check further into it.

Now, with the auction live and only one week to go, I see that the item has not been withdrawn. Thus, I just want to give my Net 54 friends fair warning on this item. Here is a link to the auction lot:

http://www.hugginsandscott.com/cgi-bin/showitem.pl?itemid=39626

[bcbgcbrcb]

Wow, since I posted this thread a couple of hours ago, it looks like 8 additional bids have been placed. I guess some people have their own opinion on the item.

[Runscott]

It was on my watch list - thanks for the warning. The scan they provided is huge and clear - I had no reason to think it was a repro. What gave it away for you?

[jerseygary]

Whether or not it's a reproduction, I don't know, but I do know the dates given are wrong because of the uniform style and the presence of Jud Wilson on the team. He played for the Grays twice, 1930-31 (they had simple gray uniforms with "GRAYS" in block letters) and 1940-45 when they wore different styles almost every season. According to my notes, based on the uniforms this is the 1942 team.

[bcbgcbrcb]

The most distinctive thing about the photo that sticks in my mind is the spider veins effect in the background of the upper-half of the photo, clearly evident in the enlarged scan provided. Also, you can't tell from the scans but once you have it in hand, the photo quality is not that of an original photo.

Gary:

You are correct, it is the 1942 team.

[prewarsports]

That looks like a reproduction for sure based on the ink and paper from an enlarged scan.

[D. Bergin]

The most distinctive thing about the photo that sticks in my mind is the spider veins effect in the background of the upper-half of the photo, clearly evident in the enlarged scan provided. Also, you can't tell from the scans but once you have it in hand, the photo quality is not that of an original photo.

Gary:

You are correct, it is the 1942 team.


Looks like they are advertising it as a "Premium", not an original photo. It could very well be a printed photo from close to the era. Looks old, just not original.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I don't really think so, Dave. I believe that it is a modern reproduction intentionally printed on aged paper made to mislead people.

A few years ago (when I originally bought mine), there were quite a number of these types of Negro League pieces originating out of the Midwest. I also owned an individual Satchel Paige photo that also turned out to be a fake and I lost some money on that one also.

[D. Bergin]

I don't really think so, Dave. I believe that it is a modern reproduction intentionally printed on aged paper made to mislead people.

A few years ago (when I originally bought mine), there were quite a number of these types of Negro League pieces originating out of the Midwest. I also owned an individual Satchel Paige photo that also turned out to be a fake and I lost some money on that one also.


You could be right Phil. Hard to tell without having it in hand I guess. I had several similar style photos last year that came within a collection of older material I wasn't sure about either.

I ended up selling them on Ebay as a group of unknown dated photo prints, including Paige (to a Net54 member), for a song.

Actually, I ended up giving them away for free because our cat puked on some of them between the auction listing and when I shipped them out LOL!!!

The cat probably knew something I didn't. :D

[Hankphenom]

Has that distinctive coloration, not sure what the process is, but by now we've all seen hundreds of them--photos, posters, cards, etc.

[Runscott]

Looks like they are advertising it as a "Premium", not an original photo. It could very well be a printed photo from close to the era. Looks old, just not original.

Thats what I was thinking. Only the original Poster has actually held this, so he's the only one who knows for sure, but the scan looks similar to some of the cheap premiums that I've seen from that era. It doesn't have to be a real photo to have collectible value.

[prewarsports]

Regardless of whether we are talking print or photo (this would obviously be a print) it is not authentic, you can tell by the paper and the crazing in the black portions and the fact that the photo is not very crisp. 1942 was during WW2 and paper was scarce, but technology was good. I doubt that they would have made a "print" of a Negro League team at this time period where paper was in such short supply that they were having scrap paper drives on every street corner. 99.9% sure by sight alone this is not authentic to the period add in the WW2 factor and with Phil's assesment I would say we are pretty certain here.

[Runscott]

Regardless of whether we are talking print or photo (this would obviously be a print) it is not authentic, you can tell by the paper and the crazing in the black portions and the fact that the photo is not very crisp. 1942 was during WW2 and paper was scarce, but technology was good. I doubt that they would have made a "print" of a Negro League team at this time period where paper was in such short supply that they were having scrap paper drives on every street corner. 99.9% sure by sight alone this is not authentic to the period add in the WW2 factor and with Phil's assesment I would say we are pretty certain here.

I'm sure it's not authentic, because the original poster (the only one who has held the piece) says so.

I'm surprised that every print you've seen from the '40s was crisp and made using the best technology available - I've seen plenty of cheap-looking items, some much cheaper-looking than this, that were period.

But if everything you've seen was made using the best technology available (and you've never seen any 1940's supplements or premiums), then I completely understand why you are 99% sure that this is not period.

[jerseygary]

I agree with what Runscott said, I've seen many poor quality print items from the war years - I collect scorecards from that period and the paper and printing especially on minor league items are worse than they were in the 1930's when quality paper stocks were limitless and all the master printers were not in the service. I'd venture to say that ephemera from Negro League teams would be of the same quality as the minor league and semi-pro stuff I have. As for wartime shortages, the Grays made much of their money playing exhibition games with town and semi-pro teams even during the war and advertising was very important so I could see how a generic team photo might have been produced in 1942 or 43 by the Grays to send out in a press kit type of thing but I would expect a team name or contact to be printed on the front or back. If it is on card stock it could have been cut down from a larger broadside - we've all seen that before.

That all said, I'm in the camp that this is not real, just made to look old. The printing looks a little "soft" to me, not what I would expect from that time period. The paper looks too aged as well - wartime paper was pretty poor stuff but unless this is printed on thin paper (which is very brittle and turns yellow) and not a card stock I would expect it to have been a little less yellow.

And by the way Smokey Joe Williams is not in that team photo - he retired about 10 years before the shot was taken.

[prewarsports]

I think I did not make myself very clear, I was just saying that good technology was available in 1942, not that it was always used. I was just saying that poor quality combined with paper shortage of WW2 made the possibility of this being authentic even less. I agree with you guys, just did not myself very clear.

[vintagehofrookies]

Phil,
Thanks for pointing that out as it was def. on my watchlist!
Dan

[bcbgcbrcb]

Good point, Gary. Although "close examination shows Oscar Charleston & Smokey Joe Williams", for some reason I can't spot them, maybe the description can identify their row and place in the photo? Of course, neither was with the Grays in 1942 so that might be tough...........

As far as I can tell, any credibility that the consignor of this item had goes out the window with the incorrect date identification of the photo along with the incorrect player ID's in the photo. Now, why would we believe them if they say that it is authentic?

[jerseygary]

I know Phil, just a quick glance at the players will reveal there isn't a Smokey Joe or Oscar Charleston in that picture. The dating I can give them a little leeway on, not many people are knowledgeable on the uniform styles worn by the Negro Leagues. Being an illustrator/designer I've studied them and have a big library of notes and photos that help me make my illustrations as accurate as possible and the Homestead Grays, along with the KC Monarchs are the 2 teams that make it easiest to ID a date because they changed uniform designs almost every year.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Well, I guess that this lot is not going to be withdrawn from the auction as it is now closing night with only a couple of hours to go until extended bidding and it's at $550. I'm still hoping to find Oscar Charleston & Joe Williams in the photo as the lot title states and we already know that the correct year is 1942...........

[HRBAKER]

Phil,

Thanks for the heads up.
You did ALL YOU could do.

[Runscott]

Well, I guess that this lot is not going to be withdrawn from the auction as it is now closing night with only a couple of hours to go until extended bidding and it's at $550. I'm still hoping to find Oscar Charleston & Joe Williams in the photo as the lot title states and we already know that the correct year is 1942...........

It's a shame that we're now seeing the same deception and fraud with photos and postcards, that we've always seen with autographs and game-used items sold at major auction houses. It's all about making the consignor happy, and all's fair in that goal - but they are forgetting that today's buyer is tomorrow's consignor.

[Matt]

Well, I guess that this lot is not going to be withdrawn from the auction as it is now closing night with only a couple of hours to go until extended bidding and it's at $550. I'm still hoping to find Oscar Charleston & Joe Williams in the photo as the lot title states and we already know that the correct year is 1942...........

I don't think either is in there. The fellow standing all the way on the left of the photo could be Oscar Charleston, except Oscar was a lefty and that fellow clearly has his left hand in a glove. I don't think anyone else could be construed as Oscar in the photo; he only played for the Grays between 1930-32.

FYI - I emailed Josh Wulkan earlier this evening; he wasn't convinced Charleston wasn't in the photo.

[Kenny Cole]

No, neither Charleston nor Williams are in the photo, but I believe that Jud Wilson is in it, kneeling, second from left.

[bmarlowe1]

Unfortunately I don't have very much from this time period - but what should be done is to at least post nice big photos of the Grays' 1940's uniforms next to the H&S photo.

For my part I challenge them to tell us which guys are supposed to be Williams and Charleston and to post nice clear hi-res scans of those two faces. If they don't it's fair to presume that they don't want any of us to see this too clearly.

[Leon]

Unfortunately I don't have very much from this time period - but what should be done is to at least post nice big photos of the Grays' 1940's uniforms next to the H&S photo.

For my part I challenge them to tell us which guys are supposed to be Williams and Charleston and to post nice clear hi-res scans of those two faces. If they don't it's fair to presume that they don't want any of us to see this too clearly.


Hi Mark
The picture I see in the auction can be blown up on my screen much larger than my whole 19" LCD. How big should it be to get a good look? I have no idea about the photo, it's not my cup of tea. It's neat though.

[ElCabron]

I'll never understand why people are so horrible at identifying people in photographs. Are you guys like that with your own family photos? Are you sure that old photo of your great grandfather isn't really your uncle?

Even though Charleston and Williams are 100% absolutely NOT in this almost certainly fake photo, it does still have 4 HOFers. Josh Gibson, Ray Brown, Buck Leonard, and Jud Wilson are all there. Maybe the problem is that it's actually Josh Gibson and not Net54 Josh Gibson (i.e. any random black guy in a photo or postcard you own).

I can see missing Vic Harris or Sam Bankhead or Roy Partlow or Johnny Wright or Howard Easterling or Roy Welmaker or Jerry Benjamin or guys like that. But Gibson, Leonard, Brown and Wilson all have plaques with their faces on them in Cooperstown.

-Ryan

[bmarlowe1]

I'll never understand why people are so horrible at identifying people in photographs....Are you sure that old photo of your great grandfather isn't really your uncle?.....Net54 Josh Gibson (i.e. any random black guy in a photo or postcard you own) -Ryan

The great grandfather - uncle type confusion is not uncommon. Identifying people for whom one has only seen a small number of still images is actually very difficult for most people, even if the images include a HoF plaque. And, the "Net54 Josh Gibson" is not just a phenomenon we see for black ballplayers.

Leon - blowing up a low res image does not help - you just get a bigger blurry image. It has to be posted in hi-res. Anyway, my guess is that Ryan knows these players well.

[repsher]

Uh-oh guys. I think I might have just purchased this photo. Even though the link in the first post of this thread isn't working for me the descriptions sound like this photo. Can someone please confirm?

115891


I didn't really have time to research since there was only 15 mins left in the auction when I saw it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1940-GRAYS-VERY-RARE-NEGRO-LEAGUE-ORIGINAL-TEAM-PHOTO-W-JOSH-GIBSON-LEAONARD-/190908130283?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT&nma=true&si=fdJDgdGJoBzXoE5cdlxKuvtDw60%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

[bcbgcbrcb]

Ryan:

That one's no good, ask for a refund.

[repsher]

Phil - Is this the one you owned?

I haven't paid for it yet. The seller does have a 14 day return policy. I assume I can just explain that I would return it anyway so maybe we can skip the rest of the process? I've never been in this situation before.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Yes, that's it, Ryan.

[repsher]

Thanks Phil. I'm seeing what I can work out with the seller to "return" the photo even though I haven't paid for it yet.
Shame this photo keeps showing up like a bad penny.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Yeah, there are many others as well. May not even be the exact same one but many reproductions were likely made.