New Buck Ewing cabinet card, provenance needed?
 

Hello again. I recently showed a cabinet card and showed a few in the past. This one I share with you now is a Buck Ewing. I believe we are all familiar with Buck’s face. Hard to dispute. Is provenance needed? Provenance meaning “history of ownership.” Do we need the “history of ownership” to positively affirm the identity of this image as Buck Ewing. Is facial recognition a technical process, familiarity of a face or the history of ownership. Should facial recognition ever be brought into the equation if there is a “history of ownership.” What seems a need for “history of ownership”? Is the “history of ownership” in determining authenticity of a face or the last? If two images of Michael Jordan are being compared, when does “history of ownership” come into play? I think we all seen the minor league cabinet card that names Honus Wagner as being a player that is obviously not him. Wagner may not even be in the image. There’s one guy on the opposite side of the team photo that might be him. At some point the pen and pencil markings need to be double checked a little better. That card has sold in auction. Should an authenticator need to know the “history of ownership”? Do you need an authenticator to tell you this is Buck Ewing? Are authenticators needed when a face is unfamiliar? Does the “history of ownership” have any revelance to determine whether an image is person? I’m still trying to figure to save my pics as JPEGS. My apologies.Attachment 540044

Is this going to be another Jim O'Rourke or Asa Brainard thing where you find an old cabinet card and then try and find a match with a famous base ball player?

David

It's all about the ears David...

When a Fleer Michael Jordan is auctioned off, is the “history of ownership” part of the equation or a deal breaker? When you represent a card as Buck Ewing, does it then become a question of facial recognition? If it’s passes facial recognition, does it then become a question of “is the card physically authentic”? Attachment 540051When does “history of ownership” come into play? If the Buck Ewing in question is published by a known baseball card maker, does it then become a question of physical authenticity after the recognition work has been done? Is there a need for the question of “history of ownership” at that point?

I agree it’s all about the ears. Other factors Attachment 540052come into play when ear detail ain’t great. Does this pass the ear test?

I'll play, no it doesn't, the ear canal is distinctly different as is the pronounced peak in the photo on the right, as well as the shape of the lobe. Plus the head on your cabinet is taller than the Ewing photo you posted.

I'll admit it's a close resemblance and hope it's genuine, but you should spend the dough to have it authenticated, would be worth your while. The best advice for things like this is "Send it to Henry".

When a 30+ year old Jordan photo is sold, he, and likely the photographer, are both still alive and have either marked the photo or can otherwise personally verify it is Jordan if there is any question.

Your cabinet/photo is possibly 130+ years or so old, the subject and photographer both long dead, along with anyone else alive at the time it was taken to identify who this is. And with apparently no markings or writings on it to name who the photo is of, the photographer that took it, or from what studio it came. At least none that you've shared with us. There are no uniforms or signs, background buildings or landmarks, or anything else in the photo to help identify who it is and where/when the photo was taken either. And the subject is wearing a suit and tie, sporting a handlebar mustache, and wearing a bowler hat I believe, all just like so many men wore and sported back in the day.

And just because it may resemble Ewing somewhat, still doesn't make it provable it is him. I've seen photos of numerous doppelgangers over the years, much better than this one. And with no additional evidence, markings, provenance, or even a verifiable chain of ownership through till today, what you have is a nice clean old photo/cabinet of an unidentified man from probably back in the late 1800's, and that's it. Unless you can somehow get one of the renowned and respected baseball historians or so-called experts to go out on a limb and declare that is Ewing. But I wouldn't go holding my breath waiting for that to happen if I were you. Good luck otherwise.

Ewing passed away in 1906 at the age of 47. The guy in photo looks too old to be Ewing.

The Buck did not stop for that photo..

What we can tell from the two photos and the extent of the similarity…

They are both Human
They both have Ears
They are both likely Male

…that is about it.

Yawn. Are we being trolled?

Sincerely,

William H. "Shoeless Joe" Bonney

Detroit58, is this you on ebay with the Cy Young rookie?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/13429904093...sAAOSwYpNjWGBi

https://www.ebay.com/sch/m.html?item...relics&_sop=16

"Not CY Young " listing also has these gems. The middle photo is alleged to be Mike Kelly!!!
At some point you cross a line between being really bad a photo matching and ......
Jonathan Sterling

This guy is something else....

I'd vote this is a joke, but there appear to be many collectors that think any card ever made must picture a baseball player.

Many moons ago, I was an avid 10 year-old baseball history nut and collector. I was in an antique store and was convinced I found a cabinet of Cap Anson.

By the time I turned 11, I realized that to the untrained eye, every man from the 1880's with a moustache looked like Cap Anson.

I still have that cabinet somewhere, which is worth the same $3 I paid for it way back when. Accounting for inflation, I've lost money on it.

Crap, did I miss out on yet another GREAT cabinet? Why do I keep missing out?

Amazon Rekognition Attachment 540167

Amazon Rekognition Attachment 540168

If someone out there is capable of doing facial recognition work, post it. You are the joker buddy. I made pretty clear points. Didn’t insult anybody. If you say this isn’t Buck Ewing and you don’t provide facial recognition, you’re either a hater or a fraud. Likely both. Posted 2 Buck Ewing’s. And trust me I got more. I got 2 exact look alikes? Your a joker and fraud. To argue small difference in ear detail, you would be saying the heads are at the same reference points. You are looking at 2 different sides of the face. I’m a joker. Bring on your best guy. I ain’t got time nowadays. Who’s your top dog? The King Kahoona still? That’s a joke. Show your work. I did. I can show more. Did King Kahoona learn about rolling faces yet? Maybe someday

That " King Kelly" is nowhere close!

Its not buck ewing not even close

Can somebody besides me post facial recognition work? Is anybody capable? I know 2 different cabinets that pass recognition apps at 95 are a dime a dozen, but is anyone at Net54 capable of facial recognition work? Just a honest question. Can any of you who posted add your photo recognition? I know your not calling me a joker unless you did some honest recognition work.

96.7 % similarity scores

Doug, you asshole. I was eating something while reading this thread and half of what I was eating landed on my keyboard when I read your post... :mad:

So which of the chronies does facial recognition? Anybody. Frauds.

Hello world of Net54. I have 2 Buck Ewing cabinet cards. Do any of you know how to do facial recognition? Can anybody recommend a website that has people who might know how to do facial recognition work?

OK I'll bite . I usually don't get involved in this sort of thing . I basically post on the autograph side but here I go .
I feel it is not Buck Ewing for the following anatomical reasons (I am a dentist with a practice concentrated on implant restorations and cosmetics ) so here I go :

1.The Helix of the ear in the left photo is compressed close to the scalp on the right in the Buck photo the Helix protrudes away from the scalp.
2.On the left photo the Antihelix is larger than the Antihelix in the Buck photo
3.On the left photo the External Auditory Meatus is larger in diameter and rises higher in the left photo than in the Buck photo
4.The Tragus in the left photo is lower and more pointed than in Buck's photo
5.The Lobe in the left photo is not attached ( it's called free in some terminology ) to the face / posterior cheek area above the TMJ area with a clearly defined separation between the face and ear lobe and this face / ear lobe area while in Buck's photo the same area appears attached lower with little or no separation between the face / jaw and ear lobe . This is a genetic trait passed from parents to offspring.
6.The angle of emergence of the ear from the head on the left photo is less with a farther back position than in the Buck photo
7. The distance from the head to the helix of the ear and from the head to the lobe is greater in Buck's photo than in the photo on the left
8. Lastly the overall gross ear position in the photo on the left appears higher in relation to the mandibular ( lower ) jaw angle /line than in Buck' photo .
Also remember the eyes remain the same size from birth to death and the basic socket form doesn't change during our life either , it may wrinkle but the shape remains the same unless you get an eyelid tuck
.
I say it's not Buck Ewing and I've been looking at and studying baseball for over 50 years.

So there's my facial analysis from looking at faces for years . If wrong I will apologize .

I apologize...

For smiling devilishly while reading your post.

Doug "Aren't we all frauds on some level?" Goodman

I want physical recognition facial recognition. Anybody with half a brain can see your words are worth dog poop

Can we start with which of the 2 cabinets you are talking about to be fair or if you want to look as smart as you think you are. I would love to address your words, but start with what you are addressing champ

That means you klldds

I see OP has taken the time honored approach of continuing to dig instead of climbing out of the hole.

I love when these guys call everyone else a “fraud” for not buying into their BS.

Oh, what the heck. Let me make a couple of observations- one personal and one professional.
I have idly looked through bins of old photos in antique stores up and down the east coast for quite a while (I like old landscape/architecture photos) and never in the history of ever looked at a cabinet of an old guy with a mustache and Edwardian clothes and thought ‘damn, that’s …’ . The odds of it being a pro ball player are close to zero and certainly even more remote are the odds of it being an all time great. The odds of me winning the NYC Marathon are better.
On a professional level, as a career prosecutor, I can say that blind reliance on facial recognition software is misplaced at best. I know of several cases where criminal charges were brought based solely on such comparisons which were 100% false and led to dismissal of charges and civil actions for wrongful arrest. It may not be as ‘junk’ science as bitemark analysis or lead analysis for matching spent projectiles to other unused cartridges but it’s not far off.
Plus, what the doc in post 28 said.

I asked an honest question. What image is he describing I posted 2. I cannot reply if I don’t know what image he is talking about. If everybody says it’s obviously not him and provide no facial recognition when request, wel that’s fraud. If the shoe fits. What image is he talking about?

Not to convolute this thread, but I thought that everyone would like to see the images from the Young ebay listing that was referenced above.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/13429904093...=20001&mkevt=1

I guess the fair thing to do make rebuttals for both images just in case he was talking one and not the other. The worlds smartest man is always obvious because he talks at u n runs away. Must be smart. Does anyone know if he wax talking about the Ewing in the hat or the Fredrick’s?

Does anyone know how to get a hold of klldds to find out what Ewing he’s talking about? I’d like to start somewhere

I am shocked that a newly discovered cabinet of Cy Young from his rookie year has not sold yet. I wonder why that is...

Does anyone on this site know how to do facial recognition?

This site don’t seem very legit lot of words, no substance

Does anybody who frequents this site have skills with facial recognition? I’m anxious in anticipation. I know you guys got somebody

I see a lot of my work. Anybody know how to do facial recognition. I know you’re all great with the keyboards. Anybody know how to do side by sides?

I can’t imagine!

I got to add a second person to my ignore list today…

I believe most of the experts on N54 start with "the ears don't match". Then things progress from there... I can almost recall in one thread that two guys almost got into a fight, right here on the board, because one of the guys said the portrait of Dummy Hoy couldn't be him because "he had ears"...

It's a tough crowd here, but you're not going to find more honest or better opinions for this type of topic on ANY OTHER internet board.

Doug - apology accepted. Frigging keyboard needed to be cleaned anyway...

Is there anybody on this forum who knows who these players are being represented? I ain’t no joker. Straight business here. I take my work very serious. There isn’t anybody who is capable here of doing facial recognitionAttachment 540181

I think I see Bob "Death to Logical Things" Ferguson in one of them.

Hey Detroit I gave it a shot so I may be wrong on facial analysis but I know an a**hole when I see one

Thus is what this forum is about? Character assassination? I came here with some honest stuff and honest questions? That’s how you come at me? This stuff is on record forever. I don’t claim to be perfect, but I stand by my stuff and most of all my word. I learn quick what most of your words are worth. There is something toxic about this place.

You want to discuss the Ewing cards or continue the character assasination?

Can we discuss the Ewing cards or would you like to proceed on the character assassination?

Having scanned the entire thread of the images you supplied with their purported match, you don't have any that match.

No provenance needed, no photo match needed, no ears, no nothing, just decades of looking at and handling the real images of these players both in and out of uniform.

The only thing honest here is the people calling out your false claims. Good luck selling this cabinet of a random guy for HOF Baseball prices

Just asking for the reasons why people are saying what they are. It’s been mostly just some people talking at me. Is it safe to say it is debatable at the very least these are Ewing? Don’t see where that invites name calling and crudeness. It’s obvious something else is at play. To touch back on that I am a man of my word, I made a offer to your King Kahoona awhile back and it still stands. I’m sure it don’t mean much to him, but it stands. You can still go on being my nemesis either way

This is what happens when Q starts collecting sports memorabilia.

Rhett, you missed something - they appear to have eyes and a nose. I just wrote a testimonial in another thread about how observant and keen our board members are when it comes to these things, and now this...:eek: :p

Which player is the King Kahoona partial to? Lip Pike I think? I got 5. We can kick around see which one the peanut gallery agrees most on and it’s yours. I don’t hold grudges and I do apologize again. I thanked you from the start and I still thank you today. I have come a long way since we last talked. I think you can see that. Let me know who you looking for Kahoona. You did teach me a thing or 2 so I think I got some stuff ip your alley. You can still hate my guts. I do understand gratitude

Nope, this place is not about character assassination. This board probably has the most knowledgeable group of virtually assembled members than ANY OTHER community in the world when it comes to baseball collectibles and cards.

It's possible, probably highly likely, that many board members are so tired of this hobby being littered with crap and when posts start showing up about highly "suspect" collectibles, there tends to be this type of reaction, especially when the poster is relatively new with so few posts.

Hang in there - you can learn a lot from this cast of personalities. Don't take things so personally. Wouldn't you rather sell something that is truly legitimate rather than a 95% possible match and then find the person that bought something like this wants a refund because the fall from the turnip truck woke them up.

I got a good laugh at this one :D

dbad!!!!!

I am not an expert but like many here I have handled thousands of late 1880's baseball cards. Including the LC OJ proofs back in the day when a simple catalog request bought out a cart full of Boxes. So lots of cards over lots of years.
Here on Net54 You were offered for free, opinions by collectors of early CDV's and Cabinets. Folks who spend time and Money learning what to look for and what to avoid. And when you dont like there opinion you become antagonistic. You demand to know each and every persons process for forming their opinions. Demanding they accept facial recognition software that is known to have a long list of faults especially when comparing still photos. But I will do my best to help you progress in this area.
First, I myself was quite impressed by the Doctors analysis of the faces in question. I myself use some of the basic techniques he notes. But he as Dr. Gave me a number of new facial markers that can only help with still photo analysis. If you feel that a computer is best at facial recognition then I would make sure all the comparisons he noted were run by whatever program you use as well. I dont feel that the free facial recognition apps on the web dive deep enough to provide accurate results. So I suggest training your eyes.
Like Doug I also have found that the exercise of comparing and identifying Dam dolls can be helpful in sharpening the eye for this type of analysis. I would buy a case of 50 dolls ( All supposedly identical) and then identify all the differances. Cataloging hair legnth, how believable their smirk is, size and shape of belly button, toes ( Toes is where I struck gold..lots of differences in toes). TypicallyI would spend 15 to 20 minutes to catalog each doll the another 10 minutes or so in comparisonto its mates. I would generally spend a full weekend on one case of Fifty. If you take this up I would be happy to trade notes or offer any help I can. I know it has helped me and feel certin it will help you, as you learn the nuances of comparing still photography. I know this may sound like a basic step and it is that as well as time consuming. But given that your current techniques leed you to conclude that your posted photo is in fact Buck Ewing I believe it can only Help.
J.

You need to stop collecting photos. Seriously, you need to stop.

Some people are very good at photo recognition. Some people are terrible at it.

You are worse than terrible at this.

You claim to have 5 Lipman Pike photos from where? Where is the provenance for any of the photos?

Seriously, stop collecting photos!

You came on here to hear what you wanted to hear. You didn’t and are now angry. It is hard to hear the truth but none of your photos are what you claim them to be and deep down inside you know it is true. You are at best incredibly naive and ignorant and at worse an outright fraudster.

This is quite informative. Thank you for sharing your insight.

Thank You Eric. When I read a thread like this and see a collector has strayed so far. I feel it is up to us to set them on a propper course.

I know some rudiments to facial recognition, but it takes time, and I'm not wasting that on things that are obvious. The Cy Young images have one glaring difference that makes going further pointless. If you can't spot it you're either not cut out for this, or are deliberately misrepresenting things.

I haven't heard of Amazon doing facial recognition software, which seems to be what you use. If they do, I would expect it's experimental, or intended to locate similar products, not identify people precisely.
The "screenshots" of that recognition software were incredibly unconvincing. They look like something poorly cobbled together in Paint.

To use a set of standards,
You say it's your work. Do you work in FR or a related field?
If so, exactly what are you using to do those comparisons? What software? Or some old fashioned manual technique like I'd use. (And based on my drafting training.)
What is your methodology? And is it a standard accepted method with consistently repeatable results? Or some new thing you've come up with on your own.

In a different way of looking at it.
I've collected a variety of stuff for over 40 years. I've looked at literally thousands of antique images, maybe into the 5 figures, who keeps count. In all that time I've seen a handful of baseball images, nearly all of them amateur players in uniform. Even pictures of people at work - termed occupationals by the old photo people- aren't at all common. Since 1977 I've gotten exactly one very odd one that I put in the "maybe but probably not" category

So yeah, I have my doubts about someone finding several images of baseball figures in street clothes in a relatively short time without some rational explanation like "I bought a box of photos from a players family member"

Buck Ewing
 

2 Buck Ewings...Jerry

A new listing! His most significant discovery yet...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/13430149193...4AAOSw5bljWek9

LOL, Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder could SEE those are not the same people.

I understand if you click your heels three times and think to yourself over and over again "History of ownership, history of ownership, history of ownership, history of ownership, history of ownership, history of owne................", you'll wake up in a cornfield in Kansas with Ray Liotta wiping your brow, smiling lovingly into your eyes...and saying "You should have gone to Iowa, stupid!"

there you have it
 

great advice

If you take down all of your ebay listings and put them in a scrapbook, then into your attic forever, then you will have come a long ways. Until then, you are still trying to commit fraud, to me. This Wagner photo is hilarious. It's just some guys picture next to an Honus picture.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/13430149193...Bk9SR5iR056DYQ

I can't believe you guys are falling for this...

This is all about the New Adam Sandler-Safdie Brothers movie will focus on high-end sports card collecting thread. Obviously, this guy is a writer for the movie and he's doing research on the the N54 community. Sheesh, didn't you guys see that coming?

Seriously - that Wagner rookie at $60K is just too much. I see the fleabay feedback rating and number of sales and something just doesn't add up. What other choices are there:
<ul>
<li>The fleabay account was hijacked
<li>He wants to balance out the feedback (it's way too positive)
<li>He's trying to become a character in the Sandler movie
<li>Post your own theory
</ul>

If the Wagner was a recent ad to the ebay postings, then this is just really sad on the sellers part. I can't believe fleabay allows stuff like this to occur. Perhaps they just don't have the horsepower to monitor this crap.

Guys, back off - he made a simple typo. It's not Honus Wagner in that listing - check the hair and you'll see it's obviously Joe Tinker!

I expect the listing to be corrected shortly - and with this new match, the price should easily be over $100K!

I have to assume that he is just having a good laugh at us at this point. Here are the comparison photos that he used for his Wagner image ebay.

I should have realized this. I’m sure they’ll cast Brad Pitt to play me.

To me it is almost an identical match, but as can be seen in the photo on the left, Honus had hair growing on the outside of his ear, while the near identical Honus lookalike on the right has clean shaven ears, so obviously a photo match can be ruled out.

Now if only there were some computer facial recognition experts on here that could confirm that these photos are not both Honus...

Brian