Posted By:
Addie_JossOne final point:
I think it is clear that a lot of care went into producing the set. With the changes to team deliniation I think it shows that the producers of this set cared for its accuracy and totality. For that reason, I find it extremely hard to believe that they would use a decade old photo of his brother to represent Dad Clarkson. You have to realize, it was a conscious decision to include Dad Clarkson in the set. A decision that had to have been made prior to the set's release. Why then would they make a decision to include Dad Clarkson without securing an image of him? I just don't think it adds up regardless of how much it resembles the A & G portrait of his brother from a decade earlier. Remember, they are brothers so the resemblance should be expected.
Edited to add: Furthermore, with the Ewing examples of the set. There is a Cleveland and Cincinatti version of the card. In 1894 Ewing played for Cleveland, in 95 for Cincinatti. With so many careful alterations and amendments made to other cards in the same set I don't see how a mistake such as this, if it were a mistake, would have not been corrected. If there was meant to be a John Clarkson card in the set there would have been a second version.