View Full Version : Ruth experts opinions wanted on photo
Archive
06-22-2008, 01:21 AM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>Here is a small personal snapshot of the Babe that was removed from an old album. From the picture, can anyone guess the approx. year? I assume it's well after his playing years but I don't have a clue.<br /><br /><img src="http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s139/only_child/ruthpic.jpg"><br /><br />Thanks<br /><br />Kevin<br /><br /> <br><br>------------------------------<br /><br /><a href="http://www.AlteredCards.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">www.AlteredCards.com</a> - in-depth education on advanced card doctoring techniques & detection with detailed examples<br /><br />
Archive
06-22-2008, 01:45 AM
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>He looks older, but thin, so I would estimate 1946. I'm not a Ruth expert, but thought I would share my SWAG.
Archive
06-22-2008, 06:24 AM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Looks like the Bambino is at peace. Diagnosed in Spring '47 with throat cancer. No doubt he had symptoms and appetite loss long before going to the doc, as Ca was a certain death sentence pre-50s. Beautiful photograph Kevin, it speaks volumes. <br /><br /><br />1947 <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1214136972.JPG">
Archive
06-22-2008, 07:38 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Mid 1940's would be my guess...
Archive
06-22-2008, 06:33 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Babe died 8-16-48. Nothing new about that, not a revelation...<br /><br />And I'm not a Ruth expert.<br /><br />Still, I think Paul is about right with his 1946 date. That was my mental guess when I saw the post, scrolling down to see the responses made me feel better with it.<br /><br />FW
Archive
06-22-2008, 07:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Pennsylvania Ted</b><p>1941-43 is my guess.....Ruth's face and upper body still appear quite robust in your photo. His weight loss was not really<br /> noticeable till 1946.<br />Somewhere, I have a picture of Ruth quite comparable to yours, but can I find it ?<br /><br />TED Z
Archive
06-23-2008, 12:52 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>still looks frail in the picture.
Archive
06-23-2008, 01:52 PM
Posted By: <b>Tim</b><p>Initially I thought it would be late 46, early 47.<br /><br />I did see this pic on another board of Ruth photo's with the person posting it identifying it as early 1930's.<br /><br /><a href="http://tinyurl.com/5m3uuz" target="_new" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://tinyurl.com/5m3uuz</a" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/5m3uuz</a</a>><br />
Archive
06-23-2008, 03:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p>Wow..that's my pic, makes me wonder now, which is the copy and which is real? Mine has the borders and the scrapbook/glue markings on the back, plus the paper is (or seems to be) vintage. Maybe I should stick to cards.<br /><br /><br />Thanks for all the opinions so far. Interesting and learning a lot.<br /><br /><br />Kevin <br><br>------------------------------<br /><br /><a href="http://www.AlteredCards.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">www.AlteredCards.com</a> - in-depth education on advanced card doctoring techniques & detection with detailed examples<br /><br />
Archive
06-23-2008, 06:11 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Kevin, that very well may be your photo...if it was ever put on the internet anywhere it's likely to be posted to that forum. I've found a few of my pics there used without permission..not that I personally care since it's a forum that I post to and enjoy immensely, but I'm sure there are people out there who do care about such things.
Archive
06-23-2008, 06:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I guess I was the closest in dating your photo......so, what do I win ? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />TED Z<br /><br />