Those M114's - When Are We Going To Talk About Them?

[akleinb611]

Having slept in today (I live on Long Island and we've been hit with a middling-sized blizzard), this is my first chance to see how the seed I planted last night has grown. Not bad. I'm gratified to see that people have found something in this subject that they like as much as I do.

As expected Doug has joined the discussion, and I can second his recommendation of the Itoya art portfolios he's mentioned. The 11x14 size is perfect for M114's, and my collection now resides in a series of these binders. My advice - find a major art supply retailer, pinpoint their price for the binders - and wait for a sale!

Finally, the person who noted that the second Ted Williams poster carries a Washington DC copyright line brings up an interesting issue. The dating of these pieces is generally taken from the checklist available in the SCD Standard Catalogue, which is a good checklist but not a great checklist. There are lots of missing posters, mostly variant poses of players. The best way to date an "orphan" pose is to match it up stylistically with other posters. Most pre-1940 pieces are clearly the work of Charles Conlan, and feature either a dugout background or a dark, one-color backdrop. Fully body poses of batters with their bat raised high over their head seem to date from the mid-1920's.

And then there's the possibility of reissues. Baseball Magazine didn't move to Washington DC until about 1955; if a poster that's dated earlier is labeled Washington rather than New York, that means that what you have is a caption variation. These are more frequent than you think. There are posters issued in the Thirties, for example, that sometimes carry a copyright notation of "New York," and sometimes the same pose can be found with "N.Y." That's too much for me; check with Doug Goodman, the only person dedicated enough (or crazy enough) to collect the caption variations as well!

A final point has to do with size. Many of the 1957-era, Washington DC posters are found in the 8 12x11 size. I don't believe these were trimmed by the original owners - the cutting seems too professional. I think that in their last year of operation, BB Magazine was contemplating a format change for the posters, and may even have recut some of the older ones from the early Fifties to a smaller size, to see if that would generate more interest.

Any thoughts?

Alan

[h2oya311]

Alan - According to your article, would the following be from 1954+ and be pretty rare? I had always assumed it was from 1941 (I believe the image is), but it has the Washington address on it:



Here are a few of my other HOFers (presumably rookie images/issues for each):

[T206Jim]

M113's frame up quite nicely.

M113-Bender-framed-web.jpg

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Here are a few of my other HOFers (presumably rookie images/issues for each):

Hi Derek - I like that Cuyler, mine is pretty beat up.

Your post brings up an issue that Alan touched on when he said "SCD Standard Catalogue, which is a good checklist but not a great checklist"

Joe Gordon is listed in SCD as having two posters, one in 1938 (presumably with the Yankees) the other in 1947 (presumably with the Indians), but here is a second Yankees pose.

Also, I don't know of a second pose from Burleigh Grimes, but I believe this printing is earlier than the one you posted (although I could be wrong).

[h2oya311]

Very cool! I'm diggin' this thread as I've learned at least four new things from it!!

Doug - we'll have to chat at some point! Perhaps I have something that you or Alan need...I have several M114s and three M113s...none of which have a place in my collection (except the rookies). Maybe there's a gem in there somewhere (in your eyes).

Oh, and Jim - love your framed M113! That's a Beauty!

[Harford20]

Doug,
Thanks. As mentioned above, I have been hoarding the Ted Williams M114s (a total of 15-18 between the 2 poses), but have missed the subtle variations. I also only know of these two poses, but always on the lookout for others. I will review all my Ted's and see which variations I have; I would be interested in an order of rarity of the variations if enough "sample power" could be found for a demoninator.

Based on my limited research, I have "mostly" confirmed that the original dates listed in the SCD (your pose #2 corresponds with a 1939 actual photo and release of M114, and your pose #1 corresponds with a "late" 1940's photo and release of the first M114 in 1949) are accurate and still have been using these "pose release dates" to classify them; I will now add variations and see with other player M114 of certain release years that may have a similar type-set or word placement/length of wording to determine the YEAR OF RELEASE of these other Ted variations.

(a little OCD with my Ted collection I realize).

Dave

[BruceinGa]

Here are mine that I framed.

[bgar3]

Thank you for the informative article from scd
I only have one M114, Ashburn, which I have seen referenced as 1948. I am not a rookie collector, just Ashburn, but the 1948 date would make it a rookie. Is that date correct?
Also, I have another Ashburn premium that is from Baseball Monthly. Is it totally separate from the M114 or a variation? Thank you
Poor images are attached and I realize the M114 is in poor condition.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by BruceinGa

Here are mine that I framed.

Those look great, Bruce.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by akleinb611

Finally, the person who noted that the second Ted Williams poster...

And then there's the possibility of reissues... check with Doug Goodman, the only person dedicated enough (or crazy enough) to collect the caption variations as well!

Hey! I resemble that remark!

Ted Williams is a perfect illustration of what makes this set so maddening.

There are two different Ted poses (that I know of).

With this set, everything is "that we know of", because there isn't really a way to be sure that there isn't another different one.

Speaking just for myself, when I make a statement on this issue, it is based on what I know, or think I know, and I will have no problem being corrected when I am wrong. So, with Ted, when I say there are two different poses, and somebody has a third pose PLEASE post a picture, AND sell it to me. Or, maybe we can trade?

Below are the two Ted poses, I (with Alan's help) call the one with the stadium background pose #2, and the one on the black background pose #1. My next post will explain how there are seven different Ted Williams posters...

[doug.goodman]

So, I just posted the two Ted Williams poses, here are the 5 print variations of Pose #2. The DC difference is obvious, but the other 4 are more subtle. I need to learn how to use photoshop so that I can put those 4 in one picture and note the differences. They are subtle, but they are there. Notice the placement of the text versus the designs in the grass and the edges of the picture. Different printings, in my opinion.

[doug.goodman]

And here the 2 print variations of Pose #1. Way more obvious.

[Estwd]

Hi Doug,

Did pose #1 come out first - is that the 1939 version?

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Hey! I resemble that remark!

Ted Williams is a perfect illustration of what makes this set so maddening.

There are two different Ted poses (that I know of).

With this set, everything is "that we know of", because there isn't really a way to be sure that there isn't another different one.

Speaking just for myself, when I make a statement on this issue, it is based on what I know, or think I know, and I will have no problem being corrected when I am wrong. So, with Ted, when I say there are two different poses, and somebody has a third pose PLEASE post a picture, AND sell it to me. Or, maybe we can trade?

Below are the two Ted poses, I call the one with the stadium background pose #1, and the one on the black background pose #2. My next post will explain how there are seven different Ted Williams posters...

[lumberjack]

Alan,
The auction you are speaking of took place in New York City over two days in September of 1996. Christie's East (I don't believe there has been an "East" for some time), handled the auction. Once in a while, a catalog will turn up on eBay. They are a trip.

The auction was a big deal; the New York Times did a article a week before the sale. This was good publicity for the auction house, but I don't believe they considered this stuff to be classy material. There were about 17 thousand photos in the auction.

Bill Mastro was the big spender on the first day, buying Conlon lots and lots packed with HOFers. He may have spent in the vicinity of 40 thousand dollars. Mr. Mastro was a smart guy and may have had buyers for this stuff when he walked on to the auction floor. There were, maybe, two other big dealers who picked up a disproportionate number of lots. I can think of only one or two private collectors who may have made an imprint.

There had been the Culver sale of Bain photo about 4 years prior to this auction. Sotheby's handled that auction. That was the first time photographs went for big money. That was just a weird auction....


There were no M113 or M114 premiums, but there were about 20 lots of what the auction house called "cover" photos. I have at least one that wasn't mounted, but most were Conlon shots affexed to heavy board.

BB Magazine was around from 1908 into 1955. Between '55 and '65 it was sort of hit and miss.

The last publisher was Earl Noyes of Washington. D.C. His widow was in possession of the photo library until the Christie's sale. She had made attempts to sell the photos, but, until the Christie's auction, had no luck. You have to remember, photographs were of absolutely no value, if you were going to collect baseball memorabilia in those days, it would have been cards or autographs or programs. I have been told there was an asking price of $100,000, which would have constituted a real gamble. Who knows?

Here's the punch line: about three weeks after Christie's hauled out the 17 thousand photos, a pipe flooded the apartment where the pictures had been stored.
lumberjack

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Estwd

Hi Doug,

Did pose #1 come out first - is that the 1939 version?

I'm happy that this thread is back in action...

I do not know, and I'm not sure if it's possible to know which years many of these issues were printed.

Doug

[akleinb611]

Hello everyone. To answer the question asked about the two Ted Williams poses, I believe Doug may have accidentally transposed them, chronologically speaking. The Ted Williams pose showing a very young Williams against a dark background was issued in 1939. There is no way to know precisely when your copy might have been printed, as the M114's were kept in print and were periodically reprinted, until they weren't. There seems to have been frequent tinkering with the typesetting on the captions, which is where Doug's incredibly precise collecting efforts come in, but I don't believe anyone is in a position to know the year or years each caption type was issued.

So, to summarize, the Williams pose with the dark background was FIRST issued in 1939 and was probably reprinted and made available through 1948 or even early 1949. The second pose, showing a stadium background, was first offered in 1949, probably late I the year, and was undoubtedly available until the magazine when under. A "New York" caption line would have been available at least through 1954, perhaps later until the stock ran out. A "Washington D.C." caption line would have to post-date the magazine's sale to a DC - area publisher, which I believe took place in 1954 or 1955. The last "regular" issue of the magazine came out in 1956, but apparently the premiums were still being produced for another year or so. No word on whether the 1964-65 revival made the earlier premiums available.

There. I hope that's as clear as mud...

[Estwd]

Originally Posted by akleinb611

Hello everyone. To answer the question asked about the two Ted Williams poses, I believe Doug may have accidentally transposed them, chronologically speaking. The Ted Williams pose showing a very young Williams against a dark background was issued in 1939. There is no way to know precisely when your copy might have been printed, as the M114's were kept in print and were periodically reprinted, until they weren't. There seems to have been frequent tinkering with the typesetting on the captions, which is where Doug's incredibly precise collecting efforts come in, but I don't believe anyone is in a position to know the year or years each caption type was issued.

So, to summarize, the Williams pose with the dark background was FIRST issued in 1939 and was probably reprinted and made available through 1948 or even early 1949. The second pose, showing a stadium background, was first offered in 1949, probably late I the year, and was undoubtedly available until the magazine when under. A "New York" caption line would have been available at least through 1954, perhaps later until the stock ran out. A "Washington D.C." caption line would have to post-date the magazine's sale to a DC - area publisher, which I believe took place in 1954 or 1955. The last "regular" issue of the magazine came out in 1956, but apparently the premiums were still being produced for another year or so. No word on whether the 1964-65 revival made the earlier premiums available.

There. I hope that's as clear as mud...

Very helpful, thanks!

Evan

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[doug.goodman]

In the spirit of the multiple holidays during the next 10 days, here are the multiple versions of the Archer m113. Among other differences, note the placement of the copyright symbol both under the edge of the picture and to the left of the edge.

Doug "yes, I may be slightly nuts, but different IS different" Goodman

ps - I have fixed my numbering to reflect my agreement with Alan regarding the Williams pictures chronology.

[Harford20]

Originally Posted by akleinb611

Hello everyone. To answer the question asked about the two Ted Williams poses, I believe Doug may have accidentally transposed them, chronologically speaking. The Ted Williams pose showing a very young Williams against a dark background was issued in 1939. There is no way to know precisely when your copy might have been printed, as the M114's were kept in print and were periodically reprinted, until they weren't. There seems to have been frequent tinkering with the typesetting on the captions, which is where Doug's incredibly precise collecting efforts come in, but I don't believe anyone is in a position to know the year or years each caption type was issued.

So, to summarize, the Williams pose with the dark background was FIRST issued in 1939 and was probably reprinted and made available through 1948 or even early 1949. The second pose, showing a stadium background, was first offered in 1949, probably late I the year, and was undoubtedly available until the magazine when under. A "New York" caption line would have been available at least through 1954, perhaps later until the stock ran out. A "Washington D.C." caption line would have to post-date the magazine's sale to a DC - area publisher, which I believe took place in 1954 or 1955. The last "regular" issue of the magazine came out in 1956, but apparently the premiums were still being produced for another year or so. No word on whether the 1964-65 revival made the earlier premiums available.

There. I hope that's as clear as mud...

ALSO Quote from doug.goodman
So, I just posted the two Ted Williams poses, here are the 5 print variations of Pose #2. The DC difference is obvious, but the other 4 are more subtle. I need to learn how to use photoshop so that I can put those 4 in one picture and note the differences. They are subtle, but they are there. Notice the placement of the text versus the designs in the grass and the edges of the picture. Different printings, in my opinion.

Alan, perfect!
Doug, last month, finally picked up my 7th variation for Ted Williams (as you had posted last year--2 versions of the 1939 and 5 versions of the 1949). I agree, in looking at these versions side-by-side, I also believe each is a different print-run, and likely once yearly from 1949 through 1954/55.

I also saw that you picked up another Joe D. variation; will have to keep a look-out for those Ted variations that have not been found yet.

Dave

[doug.goodman]

Here are the three more large sized 1957 poster scans :

Missing only Frank House and Al Kaline...