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 give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB

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
  #21  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:19 AM
bmarlowe1's Avatar
bmarlowe1 bmarlowe1 is offline
Mark
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

Corey: Others, including recognized professional experts, not only may but in fact do vociferously differ not only as to their significance but whether they in fact even exist (being caused instead by photographic illusion or studio touch up)....Jerry opines that the facial mismatches Mark and Mr. Mancusi speak of, besides not being exclusionary, are not even close to being exclusionary.

I challenged Corey several times in the newsletter to produce known photos of the same early ballplayers that exhibit multiple feature differences as do Cartwright and subject C. Corey has not been able to do so. Even if one wants to limit it to dags, we have multiple dags of famous people such as Dolley Madison, Edgar Allen Poe, Lincoln, etc. If what Corey says is true, we should be able to compare dags for these people and find such feature differences. If you go through this exercise you cannot find such differences. We should easily be able to find photos of the same 19thC ballplayer that exhibit such differences. Again, you cannot.

There over 800 dags in the online Library of Congress collection. There are quite a few cases of multiple dags of the same person taken at different times. Again, you cannot find such feature differences due to the hand-tinting, “photographic illusion”, or whatever it is that Corey speaks of.

Corey:I still am having great difficulty with Mr. Mancusi's falilure to understand that in order to compare an image to another image, one must do a direct comparison. It is not sufficient to compare image #1 to image #2,....

This is simply not logical. I answered it more than adequately in the newsletter:
Mr. Richards states,"each ‘known’ image should be independently compared with the questioned image.
He asserts that it is necessary to not only compare A4 directly to C, but to also individually compare A1, A2, and A3 to C. But he does not state what difference he thinks that would make - what features of A1, A2 or A3 would compare more favorably to C? All the A's have virtually the same forehead width, so it suffices to then compare only one of them directly to C. The same can be said for the particular characteristics of the eyelid, lips/philtrum, and nose.

Last edited by bmarlowe1; 10-15-2011 at 12:57 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:21 AM
barrysloate barrysloate is offline
Barry Sloate
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 7,465
Default

Same here Leon. I apologize, just responded to David.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:24 AM
bmarlowe1's Avatar
bmarlowe1 bmarlowe1 is offline
Mark
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by novakjr View Post
BUT you now find yourself comparing two right ears(from photo 1 and 2) to a left ear from the HPD.. Also, you might be mistaken in the angle of the ear from the HPD, because it appears as though some of it is covered by hair, making it very hard to make a proper determination of the true angle.
No, the photos are oriented correctly. We can see more than enough of the ear and the entire earlobe. The difference in ear angle is huge.

Last edited by bmarlowe1; 10-15-2011 at 11:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:29 AM
barrysloate barrysloate is offline
Barry Sloate
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 7,465
Default

Jay did make an excellent point, that perhaps AJC had a relative, such as a brother, who so closely resembled him that Bruce confused the two. That is very possible, but then who are these six men in identical straw hats (I believe Mark disputed that all the hats were the same, but they look the same to me)? I would find it a near impossible coincidence that six friends would get together for a social event wearing the identical hats unless there was some bond that brought the men together. So who are they? Keep in mind that the Knickerbockers wore straw hats as part of their uniforms.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:48 AM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is online now
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 6,593
Default

To echo Brian and Jay, you really have to watch it with family provenance, especially when it is a generation or two removed. We have an old cabinet photo in our family that was passed down to my mother from her mother, who got it from her father, who came here from Poland in the 1890s. The family story was that the photo was of my grandfather in his Yeshiva [religious school] in Poland and as such it would have been the only image of our family from the "old country." It had a caption inscribed in Yiddish that no one in my family could read. I eventually took it to a Yiddish scholar for translation. What it actually said was in effect "thank you for all you've done to support our school; here's a picture of our latest graduating class" and it was dated 20 years after my great grandfather had come to America.

I don't know--no one "knows" the answer to the question. My opinion [FWIW] after seeing the evidence is that given the magnitude of the purpose of the image donation to the HOF, I tend to believe that the family would have exercised unusual care to make sure that the image that was going to be "forever" would be correct. I also agree with Scott's post to the effect that given the use of the image, the ultimate answer is less important at this point than it might be otherwise. Just like Abner Doubleday.
__________________
Please visit my web site: www.americasgreatboxingcards.com
So... move out of your studio apartment! And try speaking to a real live woman, and GROW THE HELL UP! I mean, it's just baseball cards dammit, IT'S JUST BASEBALL CARDS!
10% off any BIN in my eBay store (user name: exhibitman) for N54 members buying direct from me through this site instead, just PM me.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-15-2011, 12:12 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 3,251
Default

Barry---To me it appears that the hats are somewhat different, not all straw. Besides, per this quote from GOOGLE, straw hats were very common during this era:

1850s. The boater, a stiff straw hat with a moderately deep, flat-topped crown encircled by a petersham ribbon and a flat narrow brim, was universally popular with men and women for the country,

They could have gotten together for anything-a picnic, a theatre group, a family outing, or a baseball game.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-15-2011, 12:21 PM
bmarlowe1's Avatar
bmarlowe1 bmarlowe1 is offline
Mark
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

There is no logical reason that I should have the burden of proof. This is not a criminal case where we want to bend over backwards to protect a defendant from a wrongful conviction. We are trying to determine what is true, or at least what is probably true - that is very different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrysloate View Post
I would find it a near impossible coincidence that six friends would get together for a social event wearing the identical hats unless there was some bond that brought the men together. So who are they? Keep in mind that the Knickerbockers wore straw hats as part of their uniforms.
In very hi-res, some of those hats are clearly not straw - even Corey now agrees to that (I won't waste space posting hat photos, and whether it's 2 or 3 is beside the point) However the hats do illustrate an important point. In a 1997 article in VCBC in which he argued that the HPD was the first baseball photo, Corey states, “First, all the individuals in the image are wearing straw hats.” Corey had maintained that view until recently. Well, they aren’t. Apparently he never noticed something that was plainly obvious when you have the photo in hand (or have a super hi-res scan) until I pointed it out, even though he has owned the HPD for about 20 years. I believe that he sincerely saw 6 straw hats when some were clearly cloth hats because that’s what he wanted to see. Anyway - who are these guys?:



Last edited by bmarlowe1; 10-16-2011 at 09:02 PM. Reason: changed image hosting to phtotbucket
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-15-2011, 01:23 PM
novakjr novakjr is offline
David Nova.kovich Jr.
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 20 miles east of the Mistake
Posts: 2,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmarlowe1 View Post
No, the photos are oriented correctly. We can see more than enough of the ear and the entire earlobe. The difference in ear angle is huge.
So, you're telling me that the original HPD's orientation was either reversed, or all three of the photo's you used were accidentally flipped when you posted them. Because in the HPD, Adams(?) was facing to the viewers left, while in the three photo's you posted they were all(including the one cropped from the HPD) facing the viewers right..Which would leave me to believe that you're comparing the wrong ear.. If you flipped 'em all then I get where you're coming from, and would probably side with you in saying that it's not Adams then.

Last edited by novakjr; 10-15-2011 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-15-2011, 01:26 PM
bmarlowe1's Avatar
bmarlowe1 bmarlowe1 is offline
Mark
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by novakjr View Post
So, you're telling me that the original HPD's orientation was either reversed, or all three of the photo's you used were accidentally flipped when you posted them. Because in the HPD, Adams(?) was facing to the viewers left, while in the three photo's you posted they were all(including the one cropped from the HPD) facing the viewers right..
The original HPD is a mirror image of reality. That's why all comparisons in the newsletter were based on the image top right page 3.

Last edited by bmarlowe1; 10-15-2011 at 01:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-15-2011, 01:39 PM
novakjr novakjr is offline
David Nova.kovich Jr.
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 20 miles east of the Mistake
Posts: 2,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmarlowe1 View Post
The original HPD is a mirror image of reality. That's why all comparisons in the newsletter were based on the image top right page 3.
Very good. Since that's the case, I'm leaning toward being pretty sure it's not Adams..Not Definitely, but strongly leaning..
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
1928 Fro Joy Babe Ruth - Authentic? Clutch-Hitter Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 27 07-05-2011 11:30 PM
Cartwright Documents: Signature Question Archive Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 2 11-14-2008 01:08 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 AM.


ebay GSB