[Joe_G.]

Hello Paul, hope you enjoyed the book. Here are some thoughts in the order you asked.

Image quality was a significant factor in which card was selected for the book. If the best image was a Gypsy Queen (noting that all N175s have an equivalent N172) or cabinet it had a good chance of being selected. Some poses are only known in cabinet form (such as Kelly portrait in street clothes) leading to the cabinet being shown.

All N172s are 2nd generation prints (a photograph of a photograph). However, on average, 1890 image quality is inferior to others for reasons not fully understood. All 1890 cards are re-issues so the negatives were aging. For example, Dan Brouthers negative (43-2 Bat at ready over shoulder, looking/R) was used for 1887 N172, 1887 N175, 1888 N172, 1888 N173, 1889 N172, 1889 N173, and finally 1890 N172. This is an extreme case but as you can see some of the negatives were heavily utilized. Production cost for the cards was significant as well (note the $45k Goodwin & Company investment to produce "small photos" in 1887, pg 15). By 1890, the final year of Goodwin & Co., they may have been cutting cost where possible which may have lead to a lower quality photo. There were many steps in the production of 19th century photos (pages 88 & 89), some options more expensive than others.

There was photo quality variation at time of production but strongly suspect most of the variation we see today is the result of how the card was cared for over the last 120 years. Heavily faded cards are likely the result of heavy exposure to sun-light.

In almost all cases, Goodwin & Co. placed a "N.L." or "P.L." on the 1890 cards (some exceptions are noted). Studying the teams covered by the 1890 issue shows that only a handful of the teams players have not yet been catalogued (pg 75). Some of them quite notable.

Great Questions !