Authenticating 19th century baseball cabinet cards
 

Hello my name is Shaun and I’m a new member. I’ve stumbled on this site in the past doing Baseball research and was recommended to join when I tried a new lead on authenticating 19th century cabinet cards. I’m sure I’m not alone in the problems I’m running into. I collected cards as a kid in the 80’s and 90’s and moved on to other stuff as an adult that forced me to learn photograph history. I made my way back to cards about 5 years ago and realized the photograph history is very helpful in finding baseball cabinet cards. I picked a couple images of big name players and went about trying to authenticate them. No luck. I was discouraged and gave up for about 3 years. My first son being born lit a fire a little while back and I got back in it. Still the same problem. I’ve contacted the three companies. They pretty much need proof the cards have already been identified as the player by somebody else. I’ve sent scans of players in uniform and they still need 2 sources showing proof it is what it is. With all the money there is in sports collectibles, why isn’t there a company who can authenticate an image. The 3 graders seem to tip toe around the subject. If that aspect is not worth it for them to do, why hasn’t anybody else stepped in. Seems like a lot of money being left on the table. Can anybody give me advice?

Can you post pictures?

Hello Shaun, welcome.

There are two steps here . . .

1) confirming the cabinet authentic (In your case, I presume 19th albumen print).

2) Correctly identifying the subject matter.

Step 1 can be executed with some confidence, step 2 can be difficult. As Joe Maples requested, share some images and we can collectively suggest how significant the 2nd hurdle would be.

The second part of what Joe mentioned is certainly the more difficult part. If the player is from a well known team and is in uniform the process is easier. If it is an early image and not in uniform then identification is problematic. Collectors often see what they want to see and, unless the image has good provenance (like coming from the family of the player), the odds are against the image being of someone famous.

Edwin “Ed” Scott
 

I’ll start with a uniformed player. 1900 Cincinnati Reds. Edwin “Ed” Scott. PSA and SGC have seen it. No go. They want proof. Is a uniform and FBI facial recognition techniques enough proof. How about a turn of the century mount on the card? I tried to upload the photo twice. I don’t know what I’m doing wrong.

Post the image on a photo sharing website and then use the URL to create an image link. Images uploaded to this site will be too small to properly inspect items like this or see facial features.

Yup Jay, those cabinets with no uniform can be somebodies relative, not ball player.

Uploading photos for Shaun.
-

Question
 

I know I am in the minority, but if you already know the identity of the player, like Scott above, and know the photo is authentic, why in the world do want to pay to encapsulate it? Personally I would never pay more for a 19th century image just because it was encased. (By the way, I am not saying that image is or isn’t Scott, I am taking your word for it.) If the photos you have are professional players there is a very good chance someone on here will Id them for you. If they can’t Id them, I don’t believe there much chance a grading company will be able to Id them.

Looks like Jim O'Rourke in two of the photos - #s 1 and 4 on the top row as they show up on my screen.

Jim O’Rourke is definitely photo 1 and, in my mind, probably but not certainly photo 4.

The reason I need the images/cabinets slabbed is because the auction houses tell me they need to be slabbed to sell. The common response I get from auction houses presently: 1. We want to get these slabbed at your cost before we sell them. If I bother to ask if the listing is contingent on the encapsulation, they never include that answer in their response. What happens is they stop responding when they realize the graders don’t authenticate or they go ahead and sell it unslabbed under a very vague listing that is doomed to fail. Sometimes they just send it back. 2. Prove it. I thought that is part of why the auctions are taking money as a third party. Is that unprofessional or what? 3. The latest greatest from the wonderful auction houses-We will not confirm or deny it is said player. One of the auction houses told me “don’t show me nothing unless they’re in a uniform.” I apologized to him and sent him a scan of a Bruce Petway snapshot in Detroit Stars uniform with his catchers glove doing pre game warm ups. He hasn’t responded to me since. The reason I want to sell 19th century cabinets is that I am an aging man with a young family. My wife was born a war refugee and is a cancer survivor. Trying to provide my family a better life is the least I can do. If slabbing is worthless, what’s my move eBay? What’s a Gilbert & Bacon Jim O’Rourke worth? I don’t understand with all the money in baseball, how is eBay the move?

Hi Shaun - Can you let us know who you think is pictured in each of three cabinets that Phil posted for you?

Do you think that the Gilbert & Bacon cabinet pictures Jim O'Rourke?

I don't know what photos belong to the OP and why he claims they are to be of.

I see two full cabinet cards, but don't know what is the claim about their supposed identity. The Gilbert & Bacon obviously is not of Jim O'Rourke.

Sorry for the poor presentation of my case. I’m a new member and I’m not very computer savvy. Another member did me a favor posting the photos. The Gilbert & Bacon, like it or not is Jim O’Rourke. The Montignani is also Orator Jim. The cdv is a Moses Fleetwood Walker cdv I sold in 2018 I used to explain my back story to the member who helped me post the photos. I will be the first to tell you gentleman you are my superiors in the computer world. What brings me to you is I need to know is there a baseball image authenticator?

Contact member Bmarlowe1

He's extremely good at facial recognition and many AH's respect his opinion. Not sure what his fees are.

But first and more importantly, you need to be open to hearing the truth good or bad. Seems like you are already convinced on your "O'Rourke" photo even though that is clearly not him.

Gilbert & Bacon cabinets, as far as I know, only feature Philadelphia teams. Jim O’Rourke would not be on a Gilbert & Bacon cabinet. 100% that is not him. The other cabinet is, in my opinion, extremely unlikely to be O’Rourke, even though the Bridgeport location of the photographer is a plus for your case.

Each post clearly represents why there is a need for a third party authenticator. Some posts said clearly him, some said clearly not. I’m not a psychic, but I could of wrote these posts myself. I have a large list of cabinet cards. Some hall of farmers and some players nobody’s heard of. Some of them are uniformed some of them not. We could go through each and every one and guess what, some will say no doubt him and some no doubt not. I’ve done the FBI facial recognition on all of them, so yeah I’m pretty confident. Its not an opinion. Was your comment an opinion?

Jay - FWIW, I did a little Googling and according to SABR, photo 4 is O'Rourke.

https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/jim-orourke-2/

I didn’t get a chance to reply to the Gilbert & Bacon comment. Gilbert & Bacon were photographers, not baseball card makers. They were photographers of well known 19th century people. Jim O’Rourke was a star baseball player who lived in Bridgeport CT. Not to far from Philadelphia. I imagine he spent some time in Philly not including the numerous road games over a long career. The photographers were at this address from 1886-92 if any cares. The Montignani dates 1888-92. I did the facial recognition on all my images. Try it, you’ll get there. Follow the hairlines. Follow the facial features. The chunk and comb over on the Montignani can be hard to believe, but do the work. It’s him. The comb over is another of his known images. O’Rourke put on weight in his late career. Where did he get the flabby double chin in his late pics? The fact there is an argument over whether 2 known images Orator Jim are him or not makes my point to an exhausted level. Who’s on first?

Brick wall alert.

Here’s my proof. This is Jim O’Rourke. Who disagrees. This is my confidence. I can take criticism if there’s something to critique. How do I authenticate this? Am I the authenticator? If you can’t tell this is Orator Jim, you aren’t the authenticator. All I asked is who authenticates. All anyone had to say is this isn’t Jim O’Rourke. Well?

This ain’t about ego. This ain’t about who has the best cards. I have a family to feed.

Neither of the cabinet cards can be authenticated as Jim O'Rourke, as neither are of Jim O'Rourke.

Explain

Keep in mind I just proved it

Let’s start with the Gilbert and Bacon with the side by side FBI comparison. What you got Doc anything but words?

I asked who is an authenticator. Everyone wanted to proclaim themselves as so. “It’s not him.” Oh. Here’s proof it is. What was everybody talking about it’s not him. I’m ready all at once or one at a time. What you got?

If there truly is someone on this forum who can authenticate, the Gilbert and Bacon should be a no brainer.

I scaled the ears at 1/2 inch on both images. The pupils on both images end up spaced at 5/16 inch if anyone knows what I’m talking about. Compare them with any O’Rourke. I can post the side by side without the lines if anyone needs to verify my scale again if you know what I’m talking about.

Is this guy the brains of the operation? Proof doc, do you know how to?

Are you talking about the Gilbert and Bacon image? Who said that it is clearly O’Rourke?

Convincing a grading company to encapsulate a unique 19th century cabinet photo of a baseball player in street clothes is a very difficult task (even with proper supporting evidence) so I can understand your frustration.

With that being said, I honestly do not see a resemblance between Jim O'Rourke and the man featured in your Gilbert & Bacon photo.

Furthermore, in my personal opinion, the photo you say you sold in 2018 of Moses Fleetwood Walker also does not resemble the player in question.

To me the key to authenticating is to not push yourself to prove something to be authentic, but rather to try your absolute best to disprove its authenticity. Emotions and financial investment can often cause people to see what they want to see and that is simply not the mind set required for proper authentication.

Will somebody please address. Set your egos down and look at evidence. I have a list of cabinets and I can show this proof for everyone of them. My frustration is with a club full of egos. Look at the evidence I present. Address. I’m not talking about what your ego is telling you to say. Address my evidence if you are able

Really?
 

Attachment 466770

Attachment 466771

Regardless of who the owner thinks is on that cabinet card, if you are looking to sell it no one is going to authenticate that it is Jim O'Rourke and no one is going to pay what an O'Rourke cabinet would go for.

Why? It looks nothing like him.

I'm just trying to understand this...is the image with two guys and the squiggly lines supposed to be the "side by side FBI comparison"? Don't they have a slightly more complex way of doing facial recognition over at the FBI? :confused:


.

If your comparative images had red squiggly lines, they would be way more believable! :D

I am not sure what evidence you think you are presenting. These are clearly not the same player. Just look at the ear comparison that is listed above. Also, I am not sure where egos come into play in this.

Collectors see whom they want to see and it is difficult to change their minds. Same thing has happened with Real Photo Postcards and Vintage Photos recently too.

I agree with Chris, authenticated or not, no one, at least not from here is going to pay top dollar for O’Rourke on that image. If you have already sold “Fleetwood Walker”, unauthenticated, why bother with these? The money you keep citing is not necessarily in 19th century stuff anyway, at least not to the extent it seems to be in more modern stuff.

On the Gilbert and Bacon-
Jay is an expert on 1800's player images, whether they're cards or cabinets.
Of course they took pictures of famous people, as well as thousands of less famous businessmen, tradespeople, and pretty much anyone who saved up the price of having their picture taken.
As has already been pointed out, while there may be approximate similarities in vertical spacing of facial features (And yes, some lines drawn in paint are only approximate... ) The ears are completely different. And different from the later in life pics.
Bmarlowe1 can explain that better, if I'm not mistaken he does a lot with identifying photos for SABR and maybe a few other groups.

On the Montignani -
That's a nice picture, but not O'Rourke.
The subject is wearing a fire department uniform, and as far as I can find out, O'Rourke didn't have involvement with the BFD until the early 1900's, a decade after the photographer stopped doing business.
And at that he was commissioner, not a ordinary member of firehouse 4.

To address the ear. Every detail is exactly the same. Appears to be slightly wider in the mid lower portion in mine. How could every detail match, but be wider in a spot you ask? I’ve had this discussion with “experts” in the past. I don’t name drop. I will explain further if you need. We can both agree that the num num Jim head is more face forward. The Gilbert and Bacon’s head is turned more. Evident by half of his mustache to be missing in my photograph. I hope we can agree your ear looks every so slightly smaller or bigger as you turn face towards or away from the the viewer. I’ve had this discussion with the SABR boys in the past on 2 Fleetwood Walker images and a George Davis. I had to explain why the appearance of the ear slightly changes as your head moves. There was dispute of some markings on Davis’ ear in a Sporting Life image to my Davis. I had to explain ad you turn your head detail slowly disappears. I did a case study on the wrinkles on my ear lobe similar to those of Davis. When I looked in the mirror and slightly turned my head,the wrinkles were very quickly no longer visible. I offered to send a video. I don’t know if they learned from me. Everybody I talk to seems to understand that ear appearance slightly changes when your turn your head. Them, no. If you look at side shot of your ear and the front they don’t look like mirror images. With every degree of turn of your head, your ear looks a little different. Understand? I’ve done the leg work as far as it can go on the uniform. Contacted the Bridgeport fire department. It’s not a fire department uniform in any way. Likely fraternal. Are you a photo expert or a uniform expert or both? If anybody wants any back story on any item that I ever show, just ask. You want to know who seen, just ask. If you want to know what the gentlemen of the Bridgeport fire told me, just ask. I can probably forward you the email. You guys have sunk a lot of trust into a few people. It’s not good when a couple control this stuff. Sometimes the have agendas. My 25 year old apprentice gave me some sound advice on the job today. Seems the technology is past the old FBI techniques. They got programs they use for court using shadowing and overlapping. Sharp kid. I’m definitely going to check into it. There’s no doubt to me it will pass. Maybe we can get some authenticating going instead a few guys controlling the market. Have you notice your boys the experts haven’t chimed in yet. I think there at the place the auction houses get to, “We cannot confirm or deny that’s the player.” Unless they want to show their butts.

I will speak more on the Montignani when the Gilbert and Bacon points I’ve made have been addressed. For full disclosure the Jim O’Rourke author has seen all O’Rourke including a John O’Rourke Sarony. I don’t name drop. He shared his opinions on the images and believes the uniform is fraternal.

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”—Mark Twain

“Hi you” …1980’s. Phrase made a comeback though for a minute there.

Who is the smart guy in your group. None of you respond, just criticize. Where’s the king Marlowe. What’s he got to say about me ear point since every speaks for him. Does he exist? Is he like the wizard of oz hiding behind the curtain? He’s a SABR guy right? Them guys need some seasoning. They been looking at there own stuff to long. Stagnant. I just want to know who authenticates. I can list pics forever. You be amazed, every single one passes FBI technique.
Some of them are in uniform. But it’s not them right?

I can see how facial features change a little when the face changes angles, but they don't completely change the look of the feature. I have to disagree that "every detail is exactly the same". That's a bit of a stretch.

I'm not an expert in photo identification and not an expert in 19th century baseball players, so Yes, I'm going to let the few experts on the board do all the talking here. (well, except for what I'm doing now of course ;)). You supposedly came here to hear their opinions and get their feedback as well.

This happens every few months on the board. Someone will come on and solicit the advice/opinion of the experts (which the OP usually acknowledges know more than they do about the topic) and are, in fact, subject matter experts. Then when the OP doesn't get the feedback they want they get all upset and claim the people on the board are all high and mighty.

The fact is, you're getting the advice from the recognized experts in this era of baseball and they are telling you the images you have are not O'Rourke. I'm sorry you aren't being validated in all the background diligence you performed and it's upsetting you a bit, but these guys aren't throwing around their egos and putting you down. They are giving you an honest critique of the images provided.

Best of luck finding folks that will authenticate your images as the players you want them to be.

SABR looks at your stuff. Picks the ones they think are not correctly identified and tell you “it’s absolutely not him.” Then you ask, “what about the other ones”(the obvious no doubters) and you get nothing but tumbleweeds. If your fortunate to get an explanation of why “it’s absolutely not him” they just may show they’re butt to the world and then decide it’s not worth looking at your stuff anymore. Don’t want to mess with the cash cow right fellas?

Out of curiosity, how much does SABR charge for their opinion?