NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:01 AM
Matthew H Matthew H is offline
Matt Hall
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,817
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saco River Auction View Post
On January 7 2013 Paul Messier Conservator of Boston inspected the card and his findings are in the detailed report which I am including.

A Quick summary of his findings are as follows.

This is a 19th century Albumen Print, and was not created with a laser, inket, or any other kind of modern photography process.

We have spent the time to be certain and to make all of you certain that this is an authentic 19th century albumen print. We have provided conclusive evidence from SGC and Paul Messier.

It is now time to move forward and sell this card. We have scheduled the sale for February 6 2013@5PM at our auction hall in Biddeford Maine.

I am currently registering phone bidders and absentee bidders, internet bidding will begin later this week.


If you would like to schedule a phone bid or have any questions please call Troy 207-650-5677

Such a beautiful item... Best of luck to you.

Last edited by Matthew H; 01-08-2013 at 08:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:03 AM
Saco River Auction Saco River Auction is offline
Tr0y Thibod3au
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 183
Default Messier Report

http://www.sacoriverauction.com/wp-c..._atlantics.pdf

Last edited by Saco River Auction; 01-08-2013 at 08:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:15 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saco River Auction View Post
On January 7 2013 Paul Messier Conservator of Boston inspected the card and his findings are in the detailed report which I am including.

A Quick summary of his findings are as follows.

This is a 19th century Albumen Print, and was not created with a laser, inket, or any other kind of modern photography process.

We have spent the time to be certain and to make all of you certain that this is an authentic 19th century albumen print. We have provided conclusive evidence from SGC and Paul Messier.

It is now time to move forward and sell this card. We have scheduled the sale for February 6 2013@5PM at our auction hall in Biddeford Maine.

I am currently registering phone bidders and absentee bidders, internet bidding will begin later this week.

If you would like to schedule a phone bid or have any questions please call Troy 207-650-5677
Hi Troy. Messier's report does not say that it IS a 19th century albumen print - it says "the photograph is consistent with a 19th century albumen print." There is a huge difference. My concern, and that of several others, was that this might be a 20th century albumen created by a forger who took the time to learn the process described in Jay's earlier post - I think the additional testing described at the end of Messier's report is what it would take to dispel that concern: "Additional work to confirm the process could include identification of the final image material, an assessment of paper fibers and an analysis of the binder."

Just my opinion. I think it's great that you took the item to Messier and I hope that whoever wins it doesn't have a bad 'gut feel' when they finally have it in hand, and end up having to send it off for the testing of the actual image.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:19 PM
yanks12025's Avatar
yanks12025 yanks12025 is offline
Brock
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: framingham, ma
Posts: 2,142
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saco River Auction View Post
On January 7 2013 Paul Messier Conservator of Boston inspected the card and his findings are in the detailed report which I am including.

A Quick summary of his findings are as follows.

This is a 19th century Albumen Print, and was not created with a laser, inket, or any other kind of modern photography process.

We have spent the time to be certain and to make all of you certain that this is an authentic 19th century albumen print. We have provided conclusive evidence from SGC and Paul Messier.

It is now time to move forward and sell this card. We have scheduled the sale for February 6 2013@5PM at our auction hall in Biddeford Maine.

I am currently registering phone bidders and absentee bidders, internet bidding will begin later this week.

If you would like to schedule a phone bid or have any questions please call Troy 207-650-5677

What happened to the Boston pic in your last auction? I couldn't find it.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:32 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,200
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yanks12025 View Post
What happened to the Boston pic in your last auction? I couldn't find it.
If I am not mistaking it was counterfeit and got pulled.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:43 PM
jhs5120's Avatar
jhs5120 jhs5120 is offline
Jason S!m@nds
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 867
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runscott View Post
Hi Troy. Messier's report does not say that it IS a 19th century albumen print - it says "the photograph is consistent with a 19th century albumen print." There is a huge difference.

This is just the common wording for any COA, LOA or legal opinion. If you read a PSA/DNA LOA it states, "The signature(s) is/are consistent considering slant, flow, pen pressure, letter size and other characteristics [...]" It never says, "This IS an authentic signature." It's simply an opinion of an expert.

Kudos to the seller for getting multiple opinions. Personally, I'm surprised the pitchforks are still out. It is a beautiful piece and anyone who is still questioning it needs to send me whatever they're smoking.

Last edited by jhs5120; 01-08-2013 at 12:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:51 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhs5120 View Post
This is just the common wording for any COA, LOA or legal opinion. If you read a PSA/DNA LOA it states, "The signature(s) is/are consistent considering slant, flow, pen pressure, letter size and other characteristics [...]" It never says, "This IS an authentic signature." It's simply an opinion of an expert.

Kudos to the seller for getting multiple opinions. Personally, I'm surprised the pitchforks are still out. It is a beautiful piece and anyone who is still questioning it needs to send me whatever they're smoking.
I speak and read the English for what it states in English. If he had wanted to, he could have said that his opinion is that it IS a 19th century albumen print.

Scott <=== consistent in facial structure with Mel Gibson
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:51 PM
Donscards Donscards is offline
Don Hontz
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Portland, Maine
Posts: 2,291
Default

Come on Guys---I would say we all know this is a outstanding piece and find---Saco River has done everything you have asked of them---the cdv is graded by SGC (to me the best for pre 1900) and now Paul Messier has certified it. I know alot of collectors would want this and with the skepticism shown on the board-are a few people trying to keep the price down----I was at the last Saco River auction were King Kelly went for $70,000---there was a phonebank of like 10 phones plus the pc's---so I think u will see the same thing here. Good Luck to the bidders on this board---The Brooklyn Team CDV will go high----Don
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-08-2013, 12:59 PM
asoriano's Avatar
asoriano asoriano is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,153
Default I enjoyed following this thread

I agree, Don. Awesome piece and best of luck to the auction house.

Last edited by asoriano; 01-08-2013 at 12:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:06 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donscards View Post
Come on Guys---I would say we all know this is a outstanding piece and find---Saco River has done everything you have asked of them---the cdv is graded by SGC (to me the best for pre 1900) and now Paul Messier has certified it.
Don, have you read the posts that you are rebutting? As an albumen collector, I clearly and respectfully stated my opinion (on a discussion forum where we talk about such things - I am guessing that you are glad we do so, as otherwise collectors would be getting screwed right and left. Am I correct?). The additional tests that Messier mentioned are available for a reason, and if a cdv that you think is worth $70K does not warrant such tests, please tell me what cdv would?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donscards View Post
I know alot of collectors would want this and with the skepticism shown on the board-are a few people trying to keep the price down
Absolute rubbish. I have no reason to want to "keep the price down", as I will not be bidding on it and have no idea who will be. In addition, I've spoken with Troy several times and he's a very likable guy. I would like the price to be very high if it's legit, and be pulled if it's not. Sound fair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donscards View Post
----I was at the last Saco River auction were King Kelly went for $70,000---there was a phonebank of like 10 phones plus the pc's
So what?
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:08 PM
Saco River Auction Saco River Auction is offline
Tr0y Thibod3au
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 183
Default Response

We at SRA have satisfied our obligations and have done our due diligence in assuring members of this forum and potential bidders that this is the genuine item that we all know it is. I have listened to the conspiracy theories and skeptics and have gone above and beyond to alleviate any fears. The time is at hand for individuals who are going to be players on this item, to line up and get your chance at one of the best, most historic finds to arrive on the market in years. We will not be performing any further forensic testing as we are convinced as to what this item is. Make no mistake, the evidence is clear, this is a 19th century Albumen print made in the 1860's by CH Williamson, and was not made by anyone else at any other time. I know that it is great fodder for forums like this in which rumor and innuendo sometimes supercede facts, for the sake of conversation. If this were a legal trial we would have proven our case "beyond a resonable doubt". I like that we as a forum are excited about this item, and no talk is bad talk, but let's focus on the excitement the sale of this item is going to create for my industry and your hobby.

Troy
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:24 PM
GaryPassamonte's Avatar
GaryPassamonte GaryPassamonte is offline
GaryPassamonte
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Morris NY
Posts: 1,460
Default

Troy,
Forgive us for being skeptical about the CdV, but that trait comes with the territory. Many of us have been stung before and we want to be positive about authenticity. The " beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is not 100%. The onus of proving absolute authenticity and instilling confidence in buyers rests with the seller and with the auction house. That said, I believe you have done everything possible to authenticate the CdV. As I've said before, we all want this to be real. I would still recommend an in person inspection of the CdV prior to bidding.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:27 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,200
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte View Post
Troy,
Forgive us for being skeptical about the CdV, but that trait comes with the territory. Many of us have been stung before and we want to be positive about authenticity. The " beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is not 100%. The onus of proving absolute authenticity and instilling confidence in buyers rests with the seller and with the auction house. That said, I believe you have done everything possible to authenticate the CdV. As I've said before, we all want this to be real. I would still recommend an in person inspection of the CdV prior to bidding.
According to the report they did a lot, but certainly not everything possible.

"Additional work to confirm the process could include identification of the final image material, an assessment of paper fibers and an analysis of the binder. "




.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:31 PM
GaryPassamonte's Avatar
GaryPassamonte GaryPassamonte is offline
GaryPassamonte
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Morris NY
Posts: 1,460
Default

Agreed, Leon. Everything was too strong a word.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:33 PM
Saco River Auction Saco River Auction is offline
Tr0y Thibod3au
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 183
Default Response

I also would recommend and would invite any potential bidder to make the trip to Maine prior to the sale date to inspect the CDV themselves in order to formulate their own opinion prior to bidding. We are open by appointment Monday-Friday from 8-4 or other times by appointment. As I have stated in my prior post we will not be doing anymore testing, but I do encourage anyone to view the item in person.

Troy
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:38 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saco River Auction View Post
We at SRA have satisfied our obligations and have done our due diligence in assuring members of this forum and potential bidders that this is the genuine item that we all know it is. I have listened to the conspiracy theories and skeptics and have gone above and beyond to alleviate any fears. The time is at hand for individuals who are going to be players on this item, to line up and get your chance at one of the best, most historic finds to arrive on the market in years. We will not be performing any further forensic testing as we are convinced as to what this item is. Make no mistake, the evidence is clear, this is a 19th century Albumen print made in the 1860's by CH Williamson, and was not made by anyone else at any other time. I know that it is great fodder for forums like this in which rumor and innuendo sometimes supercede facts, for the sake of conversation. If this were a legal trial we would have proven our case "beyond a resonable doubt". I like that we as a forum are excited about this item, and no talk is bad talk, but let's focus on the excitement the sale of this item is going to create for my industry and your hobby.

Troy
Troy, echoing what Gary said, this is a vintage baseball forum and so we discuss vintage baseball stuff - the very expensive rare items are going to be the spotlight of our discussions.

We have shown you the utmost respect and nothing in this thread has had the slightest resemblance to a "conspiracy theory". Nor were there any "rumors", "innuendos" or anything else that "superceded facts". This was just an honest discussion based on cdv traits that were in line with problems we have seen in the past.

I do realize that auction houses would prefer that all discussions about their items be positive. There have been many high-dollar items discussed here that have received nothing but praise, with no questions regarding their authenticity. You have been very forthright in your responses and a real pleasure to talk with, so there really is no reason for anyone to question your cdv, other than that it begs questioning.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 01-08-2013, 01:43 PM
Saco River Auction Saco River Auction is offline
Tr0y Thibod3au
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 183
Default Just a footnote

The additional tests that Messier mentions are tests that I decided not to have completed due to two major factors. 1st each test takes a sample of the material from the image and card itself. This is a forensic test that removes a physical sample of the card and a machine determines the chemical makeup of the image and the card. I am not about to have part of the treasure snipped or extracted from the original......probably will hurt the value....don't you think. Secondly, this round of additional testing is very expensive and is not something I decided(along with the seller) made much sense.

Troy
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:06 PM
yanks12025's Avatar
yanks12025 yanks12025 is offline
Brock
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: framingham, ma
Posts: 2,142
Default

Did it have to get reslabbed after?
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:11 PM
Saco River Auction Saco River Auction is offline
Tr0y Thibod3au
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 183
Default Response

It has been reglued back to its original form. Scott at SGC said that anyone who buys it can have it reslabbed by him or we may send it to him prior to sale to have it done.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 01-08-2013, 03:17 PM
barrysloate barrysloate is offline
Barry Sloate
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 8,293
Default

I would have it reslabbed Troy. Regluing a holder that has been taken apart doesn't sound like a good plan moving forward. It's worth the extra fifty bucks, or whatever they charge.
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 01-08-2013, 05:04 PM
bigfish bigfish is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,432
Default Cdv

Kudos to Troy and Saco River for getting two opinions. Folks that are skeptical shouldn't bid. I am sure there won't be a shortage of people wanting this item. Best of luck.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 01-08-2013, 05:38 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is offline
j'a'y mi.ll.e.r
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 5,353
Default

Toby-I think you are right that a lot of people will want the item. However, I'm not sure that there are many people, if any, who will want to pay a significant price. I don't know anyone who will go crazy for this item. Do you?
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 01-08-2013, 05:47 PM
bigfish bigfish is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,432
Default cdv

Hi Jay, hard to predict where this item will go pricewise. A rare item will bring serious interest. I guess we will see once the auction ends. I wouldn't be surprised if the price is strong.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 01-08-2013, 05:53 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfish View Post
Kudos to Troy and Saco River for getting two opinions. Folks that are skeptical shouldn't bid. I am sure there won't be a shortage of people wanting this item. Best of luck.
If I'm ever selling anything that you are skeptical about, please feel free to ask questions. Troy doesn't mind either. The only people that seemed to mind are forum members, which really surprises me - this is a discussion forum and we're talking about a $50,000 collectible.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 01-08-2013, 06:48 PM
Old Hoss Old Hoss is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saco River Auction View Post
The additional tests that Messier mentions are tests that I decided not to have completed due to two major factors. 1st each test takes a sample of the material from the image and card itself. This is a forensic test that removes a physical sample of the card and a machine determines the chemical makeup of the image and the card. I am not about to have part of the treasure snipped or extracted from the original......probably will hurt the value....don't you think. Secondly, this round of additional testing is very expensive and is not something I decided(along with the seller) made much sense.

Troy
In my past exposure to people working with items worth much more than this cdv (fine art prints and photographs), samples can be taken that probably do not diminish the value of the items and are probably not visible to the naked eye.

If you never asked, or were never told, how large of a sample would be taken, or where on the item it would be taken from, it is impossible to know if it would be detrimental to the item.

Just thought I'd share my thoughts. This has been really interesting to read, and I wish you good luck with your auction.

Charles
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 01-08-2013, 07:26 PM
Matthew H Matthew H is offline
Matt Hall
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,817
Default

Just looking at pages 5 - 11 in Messier's report... If it's fake, that's scary.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:29 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldjudge View Post
I am hearing that the CdV was rejected by Leland's as being a laser copy on a period mount. After that it was deemed authentic by SGC. If all that is true, then it seems like a photographic expert needs to cast the deciding vote.
I know nothing about these CDV's to have any opinion, but I thought this ^^ was the main reason some were skeptical on the board. It was suggested to add faith for the potential bidders and to the claims of it being a laser/inkjet copy that the CDV be sent to Messier to clear this up. And, to his credit, he (Troy) went the extra mile and did as suggested.

Believe me, I am a skeptical person myself in general, but you guys still aren't satisfied with the effort and results? I'm definatley not knocking anyone for being skeptical, as I like that collectors are-but I thought the issue was with Lelands and the inkjet rejection. I'm just trying to figure out how now it's moving to processing fibers? Please educate me- thanks.

Sincerely, Clayton

Last edited by teetwoohsix; 01-08-2013 at 09:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 01-08-2013, 10:38 PM
Matthew H Matthew H is offline
Matt Hall
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,817
Default

Clayton, I think people are interested in the card and want to know everything they can.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 01-09-2013, 12:30 AM
benjulmag benjulmag is offline
CoreyRS.hanus
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teetwoohsix View Post
I know nothing about these CDV's to have any opinion, but I thought this ^^ was the main reason some were skeptical on the board. It was suggested to add faith for the potential bidders and to the claims of it being a laser/inkjet copy that the CDV be sent to Messier to clear this up. And, to his credit, he (Troy) went the extra mile and did as suggested.

Believe me, I am a skeptical person myself in general, but you guys still aren't satisfied with the effort and results? I'm definatley not knocking anyone for being skeptical, as I like that collectors are-but I thought the issue was with Lelands and the inkjet rejection. I'm just trying to figure out how now it's moving to processing fibers? Please educate me- thanks.

Sincerely, Clayton


Clayton,

Forensic testing is a negative process, which means it does not say what something is but rather what something is not. So if the testing shows an item contains substances that were not in existence at the time the item was to have been created, then it must be a fake. But that is quite different from saying it is real. How do we know a skilled forger, knowledgeable in how items were made, could not have recreated the process in current times using materials that were commercially available in the period when the item was to have originated? In the case at hand, Mr. Messier says the photo is consistent with a 19th century albumen photo. That certainly is nice to know because had he said it is inconsistent, then case closed, the item must be a fake. But to me that says little because I never thought the image was not albumen. Any forger with half a brain would know for a fake to pass muster, it had to be an albumen photo. Why? Because, as Mr. Messier has shown, to a person with knowledge of 19th photography, determining the type of photo is not difficult. But why couldn't a forger take a genuine Williamson mount, create an albumen copy of the LOC image, and adhere it to the mount? If that was to be done then presto, you will have created a CdV in the same fashion that Willimason did in his studio. Far fetched you say? Well given the simplicity of doing it and the tremendous payoff if it passes muster, why is this possibility not plausible? This hobby has seen fakes of so many kinds. Why then not fake CdVs?

The reason for my concern is because not only has a genuine CdV of this image never before been seen (the LOC version is not techically a CdV because of the size of its mount), but of much more serious concern is that this image reflects a degradation in resolution that IMO raises the most serious questions whether it was printed from the same negative as produced the LOC image. Resolution is different from contrast. Prints generated from the same negative can and do vary widely in contrast. Think of N172s, say. A card of a particular player can come with crisp contrast or instead appear very light. But that has nothing to do with resolution, or the detail that can be seen in the image. If on a scale of 1 to 10 the LOC image is a 10 in terms of resolution, I would call the Saco River image a 5. That to me is an enormous difference, and not only have I never before seen such a difference in images generated from the same negative, I don't understand how the printing process could cause such a precipitous drop. Troy offers as an explanation that perhaps the vignette process used by the studio caused resolution degradation that reached into player images themselves. To this point all I can say is that I would want someone knowledgeable in vignette photography to corroborate that as a reasonable explaination. In the absence of such an explanation, there certainly is reasonable doubt the image is real, and the additional tests Mr. Messier describes should be undertaken.

To anticipate a question, why must these additional tests be conclusive if forensic testing is, as I have said, a negative proces? The answer is that they are not conclusive, but they would substantially reduce the chances the image is not real because the more layers of testing one does, the greater the difficulty for a forger to be so skilled as to create something that passes all known forensic testing, and too the greater the attendant expense. Is it theoretically possible, yes, but as a practical matter, in most cases unlikely.

Last edited by benjulmag; 01-09-2013 at 06:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 01-09-2013, 04:44 AM
barrysloate barrysloate is offline
Barry Sloate
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 8,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjulmag View Post
Clayton,

Forensic testing is a negative process, which means it does not say what something is but rather what something is not. So if the testing shows an item contains substances that were not in existence at the time the item was to have been created, then it must be a fake. But that is quite different from saying it is real. How do we know a skilled forger, knowledgeable in how items were made, could not have recreated the process in current times using materials that were commercially available in the period when the item was to have originated? In the case at hand, Mr. Messier says the photo is consistent with a 19th century albumen photo. That certainly is nice to know because had he said it is inconsistent, then case closed, the item must be a fake. But to me that says little because I never thought the image was not albumen. Any forger with half a brain would know for a fake to pass muster, it had to be an albumen photo. Why? Because, as Mr. Messier has shown, to a person with knowledge of 19th photography, determining the type of photo is not difficult. But why couldn't a forger didn't take a genuine Williamson mount, create an albumen copy of the LOC image, and adhere it to the mount? If that was to be done then presto, you will have created a CdV in the same fashion that Willimason did in his studio. Far fetched you say? Well given the simplicity of doing it and the tremendous payoff if it passes muster, why is this possibility not plausible? This hobby has seen fakes of so many kinds. Why then not fake CdVs?

The reason for my concern is not only has a genuine CdV of this image never before been seen (the LOC version is not techically a CdV because of the size of its mount), but of much more serious concern is that this image reflects a degradation in resolution that IMO raises the most serious questions whether it was printed from the same negative as produced the LOC image. Resolution is different from contrast. Prints generated from the same negative can and do vary widely in contrast. Think of N172s, say. A card of a particular player can come with crisp contrast or instead appear very light. But that has nothing to do with resolution, or the detail that can be seen in the image. If on a scale of 1 to 10 the LOC image is a 10 in terms of resolution, I would call the Saco River image a 5. That to me is an enormous difference, and not only have I never before seen such a difference in images generated from the same negative, I don't understand how the printing process could cause such a preciptous drop. Troy suggests that perhaps the vignette process used by the studio caused resolution degradation that reached into player images themselves to explain this descrepancy. To this point all I can is that I would want someone knowledgeable in vignette photography to corroborate that as a reasonable explaination. In the absence of such an explanation, there certainly is reasonable doubt the image is real, and the additional tests Mr. Messier describes should be undertaken.

To anticipate a question, why must these additional tests be conclusive if a forensic testing is, as I have said, a negative proces? The answer is that they are not conclusive, but they would substantially reduce the chances the image is not real because the more layers of testing one does, the greater the diffficulty for a forger to be so skilled as to create something that passes all known forensic testing. Is it theoretically possible, yes, but as a practical matter, very unlikely.
+1

Not saying the CdV isn't good, as it may be fine. But the Messier report doesn't prove it's real either. Corey is merely trying to explain what these reports actually tell us.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 01-09-2013, 05:42 AM
yanks12025's Avatar
yanks12025 yanks12025 is offline
Brock
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: framingham, ma
Posts: 2,142
Default

Say it was fake, how would he have printed the image if he doesn't have the negative. And remember the site white Betsy, they showed some items that a forger would do every little detail.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 01-09-2013, 06:04 AM
benjulmag benjulmag is offline
CoreyRS.hanus
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yanks12025 View Post
Say it was fake, how would he have printed the image if he doesn't have the negative. And remember the site white Betsy, they showed some items that a forger would do every little detail.
The process of taking a photo of the LOC image would create a new (2nd generation) negative, and he would make a print from this negative. This process would cause a degradation in resolution, in much the same way that xeroxing a document would create a copy of lesser resolution.

Last edited by benjulmag; 01-09-2013 at 08:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 01-09-2013, 07:11 AM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjulmag View Post
Clayton,

Forensic testing is a negative process, which means it does not say what something is but rather what something is not. So if the testing shows an item contains substances that were not in existence at the time the item was to have been created, then it must be a fake. But that is quite different from saying it is real. How do we know a skilled forger, knowledgeable in how items were made, could not have recreated the process in current times using materials that were commercially available in the period when the item was to have originated? In the case at hand, Mr. Messier says the photo is consistent with a 19th century albumen photo. That certainly is nice to know because had he said it is inconsistent, then case closed, the item must be a fake. But to me that says little because I never thought the image was not albumen. Any forger with half a brain would know for a fake to pass muster, it had to be an albumen photo. Why? Because, as Mr. Messier has shown, to a person with knowledge of 19th photography, determining the type of photo is not difficult. But why couldn't a forger take a genuine Williamson mount, create an albumen copy of the LOC image, and adhere it to the mount? If that was to be done then presto, you will have created a CdV in the same fashion that Willimason did in his studio. Far fetched you say? Well given the simplicity of doing it and the tremendous payoff if it passes muster, why is this possibility not plausible? This hobby has seen fakes of so many kinds. Why then not fake CdVs?

The reason for my concern is because not only has a genuine CdV of this image never before been seen (the LOC version is not techically a CdV because of the size of its mount), but of much more serious concern is that this image reflects a degradation in resolution that IMO raises the most serious questions whether it was printed from the same negative as produced the LOC image. Resolution is different from contrast. Prints generated from the same negative can and do vary widely in contrast. Think of N172s, say. A card of a particular player can come with crisp contrast or instead appear very light. But that has nothing to do with resolution, or the detail that can be seen in the image. If on a scale of 1 to 10 the LOC image is a 10 in terms of resolution, I would call the Saco River image a 5. That to me is an enormous difference, and not only have I never before seen such a difference in images generated from the same negative, I don't understand how the printing process could cause such a precipitous drop. Troy offers as an explanation that perhaps the vignette process used by the studio caused resolution degradation that reached into player images themselves. To this point all I can say is that I would want someone knowledgeable in vignette photography to corroborate that as a reasonable explaination. In the absence of such an explanation, there certainly is reasonable doubt the image is real, and the additional tests Mr. Messier describes should be undertaken.

To anticipate a question, why must these additional tests be conclusive if forensic testing is, as I have said, a negative proces? The answer is that they are not conclusive, but they would substantially reduce the chances the image is not real because the more layers of testing one does, the greater the difficulty for a forger to be so skilled as to create something that passes all known forensic testing, and too the greater the attendant expense. Is it theoretically possible, yes, but as a practical matter, in most cases unlikely.
Thank you Corey, that was an excellent explanation, exactly what I was looking for. And, I also understand that when someone is considering spending the type of money something like this would go for, they would want to have zero doubts.

I appreciate you taking the time to educate me on this, I learned alot from your post, as well as the whole thread. Very interesting. You guys know your stuff !!! Thanks again for the detailed response.

Sincerely, Clayton

Last edited by teetwoohsix; 01-09-2013 at 07:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 01-09-2013, 08:42 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,268
Default

To my eye, the examples the expert report used as comparisons all seem to have significantly clearer images.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 01-09-2013, 09:13 AM
ctownboy ctownboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 972
Default

I am not going to be bidding on this item (because I don't have nearly enough money to buy it if it is real) so I am not posting to try and bring the price down. Nor am I posting because I have anything against the auction house.

My main concern would be how the CDV smells.

The story, as I understand it, is that someone was going through a barn or out building and found an old trunk filled with stuff. One piece of this stuff was an old photo album that was musty and moldy. Inside this album were CDV's.

Now, if the album was musty and moldy then shouldn't some (or all) of the cards inside be musty and moldy? Shouldn't some (or all) SMELL musty and moldy if not also looking musty and moldy?

My thinking is, if a photo album has mold growing on it then it must have been around a source of water. If it had been around water long enough to have mold growing on it then the contents must also have some sort of mold residue on them.

But that is just me.....

David
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 01-09-2013, 09:37 AM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teetwoohsix View Post
-but I thought the issue was with Lelands and the inkjet rejection. I'm just trying to figure out how now it's moving to processing fibers? Please educate me- thanks.

Sincerely, Clayton
Clayton, good question. Mr. Messier is an expert in this field and he states that the image is an albumen. Cory explained the need for 'processing fibers', etc, but Lelands' opinion is still a mystery and I hope we will get more detail.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 01-09-2013, 11:11 AM
bmarlowe1's Avatar
bmarlowe1 bmarlowe1 is offline
Mark
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yanks12025 View Post
Say it was fake, how would he have printed the image if he doesn't have the negative. And remember the site white Betsy, they showed some items that a forger would do every little detail.
One can simply download the medium res scan from the LoC site and there are computer tools available to produce a negative directly from that. If one wanted very high res, a better scan can be ordered for about $75.

It's possible that a forger might want to then deliberately reduce resolution enough to obscure any small flaws or characteristics that might be attributable to the LoC item.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 01-09-2013, 11:51 AM
sb1 sb1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,005
Default

The CDV and auction just got a plug on Fox Business News
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 01-09-2013, 12:06 PM
benjulmag benjulmag is offline
CoreyRS.hanus
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 750
Default New Information

For those reading all the posts in this thread you know I have been expressing great skepticism as to the authenticity of the Saco River image due to the degradation in resolution compared to the LOC copy. That concern still exists. However, to be entirely fair I feel that should information come to my attention that would argue in favor of the item being authentic, I have a responsibility to present it.

Below is an image of the 1865 Atlantics mammoth plate (photographed from Stephen Wong's book "Smithsonian Baseball"). That photo resides in my collection and is a salt print. It first surfaced in the summer of 1991 when it was sold by the Connecticut auction house Nadeau's. The sister image that accompanied it in the sale was a mammoth plate composite of the 1873 Baltimores (consisting of CdVs of each player with a calligraphed overlay). Both photos were housed in identical period frames and both exhibited considerable aging. I have no doubt as to the authenticity of each image. When I asked the auctioneer where he got them, he responded he recently bought the entire contents of a local estate sale and those two images were part of that estate. The auctioneer claimed they were literally thrown into the deal for little or no consideration.

Why is this relevant? Examination of the background of the 1865 mammoth plate shows it to be essentially identical to the background of the Saco River image, and at variance with the background of the LOC image. So it would seem Williamson did use a vignette process to highlight the players. This match between backgrounds I regard as significant, though not dispositve because a forger could have used the mammoth plate to create his background. In addition, the fact remains that the resolution of the Saco River image is below what one would expect from an original CdV and signficantly less than that of the LOC copy made from the same negative. And I remain perplexed how that can be.

Taking all this into account in my view increases the possibility the Saco River image is genuine. I still feel further testing is warranted and that without it the leap of faith required to be comfortable it is real is more than I would be comfortable taking.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1865 Atlantics.jpg (72.8 KB, 433 views)
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 01-09-2013, 01:03 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,200
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post
The CDV and auction just got a plug on Fox Business News
A writer from the Associated Press (AP) registered for our board earlier today. They will probably be doing a story on it too.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 01-09-2013, 02:14 PM
yanks12025's Avatar
yanks12025 yanks12025 is offline
Brock
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: framingham, ma
Posts: 2,142
Default

I just read a article about it and someone said it will go six figures.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 01-09-2013, 02:43 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is offline
j'a'y mi.ll.e.r
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 5,353
Default

LOL, does that count the numbers to the right of the decimal point?
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 01-09-2013, 03:21 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Link to Fox Sports (AP) write up: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/1...auction-010913

Sincerely, Clayton

Last edited by teetwoohsix; 01-09-2013 at 03:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 01-09-2013, 04:57 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is offline
j'a'y mi.ll.e.r
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 5,353
Default

To me it's amazing how the press picks up a number that an auction house throws out and makes it seem like it is the gospel. If Troy had said a million they would be printing that too. What we have here is an old scarce photograph which, if Corey is right, could be a reproduction of the LOC original, or, if Peter Nash is right, could have come from the NYPL collection( if you get Peter's Halls of Shame email it is in today's edition). I have no idea how valid these concerns are, but that is a lot of questions for a little piece of cardboard to bear and still be advertised in the press as a six figure item. That said, for the sake of SRAs, the consignor, and to add some buzz to the hobby I hope it goes for a gazillion dollars.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 01-09-2013, 07:38 PM
insidethewrapper's Avatar
insidethewrapper insidethewrapper is offline
Mike
member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,345
Default

This is really an interesting thread. I don't know much about early photography , but learning on this forum. One question: Have all these early baseball cards and photos etc been donated to the Library of Congress by individuals ? Thanks
__________________
Wanted : Detroit Baseball Cards and Memorabilia ( from 19th Century Detroit Wolverines to Detroit Tigers Ty Cobb to Al Kaline).
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 01-09-2013, 07:38 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

But Jay - haven't you heard? There is a conspiracy theory that skeptics are trying to reduce the value of the card by expressing their concerns about a piece of vintage cardboard, in a vintage cardboard discussion forum

I personally think that the attention that these skeptics have drawn to the card could actually INCREASE the final bid. The original estimate when it was first mentioned here, was around $50,000 I believe. The consignor recently stated that the value had increased to $100,000. Shouldn't the skeptic advertising team get a cut of the difference?
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 01-09-2013, 07:54 PM
yanks12025's Avatar
yanks12025 yanks12025 is offline
Brock
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: framingham, ma
Posts: 2,142
Default

"Collectors have also commented that scans of the CDV appear to suggest that the albumen photograph may not have been original to the Williamson Studios mount. Messier’s report did not address this issue and what appears to have been a possible removal of a prior image close to the gilded Williamson identification. Messier removed the card from its SGC-graded holder for his examination and would have been able to determine if the albumen photograph was original to the mount if asked to do so. Messier declined comment on that issue stating he was not authorized by his client to speak beyond what is contained in his written report."

That section is from the haul of shame article. I don't understand why he can't comment on it more besides what's in the report. I know if I was going to be bidding 50-100k I should be able to ask him whatever I want about it after he looked at it. I bet after it sells in feb, it won't be the end up us hearing about it.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 01-09-2013, 08:04 PM
Runscott's Avatar
Runscott Runscott is offline
Belltown Vintage
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,651
Default

Brock, the people who have the resources and willingness to bid on this are certainly going to try to find out as much as they possibly can about it. This board and the various articles are only some of the resources they have available.

Multiple photography experts are consulted by potential bidders ANY time an item like this becomes available, and discussions abound...behind the scenes. Our board is just a discussion forum and free advertising - nobody will be bidding on this without having done their research, and nothing that we have discussed here has not been discussed ten times as much in private.

If the winning bidder is present at the auction, then the show will be over. On the other hand, if he is not (which would be ridiculous, as the price of a plane ticket is minimal compared to the price of the cdv), then future episodes will hinge on his thoughts when he opens the package. I wish it were going to be me.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 01-09-2013, 09:38 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is offline
j'a'y mi.ll.e.r
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 5,353
Default

Brock-Paul was hired by Troy. He performed his analysis based upon what Troy requested (and paid for). If Troy had paid for additional services then they would have been performed and commented on in Paul's report. I don't know what the terms and conditions that SRAs operate under, but I would hope that a winning bidder, if he or she made arrangements in advance, would have the opportunity to return the CdV if it later proved to be a fake.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 01-09-2013, 11:00 PM
wonkaticket wonkaticket is offline
John
J0hn McD@niel
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,668
Default

Maybe it came from Peter Nash himself.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for Brooklyn Dodgers collectors dougscats Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 0 11-24-2010 11:16 AM
Early Baseball CDV Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 11 07-25-2004 10:24 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:52 AM.


ebay GSB