Photography: Greatest photographs not taken

[sphere and ash]

Rhys—you can tell you’ve looked at a few hundred thousand images.

I agree with everything you say in paragraphs (1) and (2): it really wasn’t until October 1920 that newspapers felt they needed photographs of play-by-play to connect with their readers. And most newspaper photo departments were inadequately staffed (this is what had created the opening for the Bain and Thompson agencies). Even when photographers were at a game, they often photographed the first play or first few innings and then went to hand in their negatives for the evening edition.

I disagree with what you say in paragraph (3). The pivotal innovation in camera design in 1920 wasn’t making cameras more portable, but less so; making them extremely large by increasing the focal length so they could photograph action at second base. This is what allowed Wambsganss to be photographed.

I didn’t mean to diminish the idea that 3,000 hit milestones in the 1920s and 1930’s weren’t photographed; you yourself recognized in a previous post that such milestones weren’t celebrated at the time and didn’t become newsworthy until many years later.

Dewey—your point is well taken. It had never occurred to me that someone might think the walkout was historically significant, so I didn’t give it enough thought. I don’t think it would appear on anyone’s list of “100 Classic Baseball Moments,” but others may disagree. I do think the Lueker incident is more interesting, certainly photographically. Had I been a photo editor at the New York Evening Telegram, I would have loved for Conlon to bring back an image of Cobb stomping Lueker.