Real Photo Postcards (RPPC) Questions

[Karl Mattson]

I only collect 1960s Killebrew memorabilia, and while the image used for these postcards is from the early '60s, is there any way to know if the postcards are of the same vintage?

I've read that it's easy to tell under magnification if an RPPC is "vintage", but does that necessarily mean it's the same vintage as its picture? And can I make any judgment based on eBay scans? Does the back of the "full bleed" one narrow the years down much? How about the copy with the thick borders? Does that likely pre-date the full-bleed one? The seller of the thick-bordered card lists it as an original Brace postcard, but I don't understand how that's determined, or if that even necessarily dates the item to the 1960s.

Thanks in advance for any tips or advice!


http://i438.photobucket.com/albums/qq110/kmattson40/_12a_zps7b405fcb.jpg

http://i438.photobucket.com/albums/qq110/kmattson40/scan0013_zps7c475c06.jpg

http://i438.photobucket.com/albums/qq110/kmattson40/scan0014_zps7db919e3.jpg

[Runscott]

A few thoughts, as I wait for Spiderman to rescue Gwenn:


There are plenty of websites that will allow you to date that postcard back. If it passes and is early 1960's...
..and if so, it's almost certainly a real photo, but easy enough to check.
The borders certainly don't preclude it being 1960's - that was common for 1950's also.
When in doubt, I always ask myself, "would anyone have incentive to fake such an item?" In this case, the answer would almost certainly be "no"

[Karl Mattson]

Maybe I need to research further, but the web sites I've read so far only identify the postcard back I posted as no older than 1950 - but I've found nothing that tells me that it's not post-1960, or a reproduction.

As far as faking such an item, I was under the impression that RPPCs were re-issued from time to time, and also that ballplayers had copies made for autographing purposes (I know Killebrew signed a bunch of modern reproductions of 1960s team issue photos of himself, and he also signed a bunch of RPPCs just before he died that were auctioned off by his estate - so I wonder whether those could be reproductions also).

[btcarfagno]

Seems to me to be a Jim Rowe postcard. To my knowledge, these were produced mostly from the mid 1970's through maybe the early 1990's or late 1980's. I do not think that it dates to the 1960's.

Tom C

[Runscott]

Seems to me to be a Jim Rowe postcard. To my knowledge, these were produced mostly from the mid 1970's through maybe the early 1990's or late 1980's. I do not think that it dates to the 1960's.

Tom C

Bummer. Anything post-1920 is out of my wheelhouse, but I enjoy learning stuff, as I occasionally buy more modern items. It's amazing how many mistakes I make when I purchase post-war items, thinking I know what I'm doing - I certainly would have guessed early '60s for this item.

[thecatspajamas]

Not necessarily Jim Rowe, as many photographers used that same standard pre-preprinted Kodak RPPC stock. Not necessarily NOT Jim Rowe either though, and very well could have been produced by him as he was one of, if not the most prolific producers of baseball-related RPPCs during his time. It does lack his usual penned notation of the subject on the back, but I don't know if he did that all the time. Being so prolific, there are probably RPPCs produced by others floating around out there that are automatically attributed to Rowe just based on the Kodak back, but any photographer could have ordered and used the same standard RPPC stock (standard RPPC back printing was applied by Kodak as part of the manufacturing process, not the photographer).

As far as I know, there is no way to know whether the RPPC was produced around the time it was shot, or later (on up to the 1980's as Tom C says). That back was first produced around 1950 and remained the standard Kodak RPPC back for the next 40 years or so, which really puts a cramp in any attempts to date these things. Sometimes the 2nd or 3rd generation images are very obvious due to the loss of clarity and contrast (fading to an almost uniform gray in the worst cases). This one doesn't look to be as clear-cut a case, but based on the scans, I would lean towards it being a 2nd generation print re-shot from a larger original (though I might change my mind if I saw it in person).

As far as re-issuing RPPCs, the practice depends on who was issuing it to start with. Many photographers, such as George Brace, Norman Paulson, J.D. McCarthy (though most of his were printed, not RPPC), and others made a living by selling primarily to the players that they photographed, the players' family, and perhaps the occasional collector or autograph hound looking for printed images of their favorite players. Prints of all sizes were produced essentially on-demand to fill orders, with organized numbered sets or annual issues being an odd occurrence rather than the norm. And the same images were often available in a variety of sizes and finishes, full-bleed (image all the way to the edges) or white-bordered, etc (for a price, some would even hand-color a black-and-white print for you). So if the photographer is working with the original negative, and using the same RPPC stock for decades, it's pretty much impossible to tell whether a print was produced in the 1960's, 1970's or 1980's.

[drcy]

Brace stamped a lot of his stuff, including postcards, which is likely why the seller knows who made it. I searched, and the seller of the first pc is selling a ton of 1950s-60s baseball postcards, so perhaps he knows. Perhaps he got them all from a single old collection. He never shows the backs, by the way. I don't know when Brace made poscards-- perhaps someone, including the seller, does. That info may help. I recommend asking the seller about the postcard.

Brace reprinted his and others images a lot over the years-- that was his business--, so it's hard to date his photos. Except, his old photos are usually easier to id, due to the old stamp, zip code and old look (toning, etc). But a lot his stuff can be harder to pinpoint.

In recent years, his wife made photos from his images. However, from what I've seen, they have a different stamp and are on clearly modern photopaper (modern kodak branding). A lot of these photos are color. In fact, all the ones I saw were of modern player-- no Lou Gehrig reprints.

I've had Brace's photos and some Rowe photos, but never any postcards by either, so have no hands on experience or much knowledge about their postcards.

All I can add is the Brace and Rowe postcards are inexpensive. The seller of the first one has a BIN of $100 which is about 10x higher than value.

[drcy]

A thought. Brace and Rowe postcards and small photos were commonly used for autographs-- in fact, that may have been their primary use. You might want to ask about the postcards on the autograph section of Net54. The autograph folks may have more about the postcards.

[thecatspajamas]

Brace rarely (if ever?) stamped his RPPC's, but as with Rowe, he did almost always write the player's name on the back. Many of their RPPC's are indistinguishable other than their handwriting is a bit different. You can also see a change in the handwriting when Mary, Brace's daughter, took over production of the photos as Brace's health failed in later years.

As David says though, whether produced by Rowe or Brace makes little difference with their RPPC's in terms of value. Larger original Brace photos with period stamping can carry a premium over those produced later, but because the RPPC's produced in later years are nigh-indistinguishable from the ones produced in the 1950's, it usually requires some other circumstance (older autograph style, postally used in the period, etc) to see any bump in price due to age on them.

Adding: Following David's lead, I searched and found where the postcard with white borders is listed, and that price is crazy. Hard to tell from his title and lack of a back scan if it was actually done by Brace, but regardless, there is no way it would sell for that price in any circumstance other than the buyer making a mistaken assumption as to its age or uniqueness. Frankly, I would be surprised to see a signed one of those sell for that price. Unless you just gotta have it right now, I would take a pass on that one.

[drcy]

And one last point... You can wait until you find a postcard that is postmarked. Or an autographed one where the notes or reliable autograph dealer says the signature is old. Some autograph collectors noted on back the day the autograph was obtained. And I'm sure an autograph expert/dealer can give you good opinion that a signature is vintage.

[Karl Mattson]

Great advice, thanks - and thanks to everyone for their help.