Posted By:
HankronHere's the beginning and the end of my thoughts on these photographic proofs one sees in a variety of places and forms.
Firstly, one sees those Old Judge cabinet proofs. They are a lot like the regular N173 cabinets except they were made by local non-Old Judge studios (Kansas City, etc). These often (not always) have the overprints or embossments of Goodwin & Co. (Assuming they aren't Dr. Bond xerox reprints from the MastroNet online catalog), these appear to be perfectly legitimate and it would be cool to own one.
My problem (admitedly from afar) is that I occasionally see these strange ones being offered with physical qualities incongrous to the period. This includes unorthadox sizes (there was no photographic enlarging then, so it wasn't a snap for a photographer to change the sizes), and sellers advertising them as being on 'extra thick paper.' This is only compounded by the fact that some Old Judge negatives are known to exist (I know I bid on them and lost by a few thousand!). For a few of the mounted ones I have seen, the mount is 'interesting' In some cases the mount looks old, but perhaps not old enough (One of the best ways to date a cabinet card is by it's shape, color, definition, etc).
As illustrated by the fact that I said I beleive that said Old Judge Cabinet proofs are legit, I am in no way saying that that all or even most proofs are fishy. But, from the admitedly limited vantage point of my computer screen, some appear 'different' (Whenever my prim and proper aunt would see something distastefully bizarre she would politely say, "That's different.")