Babe Ruth glass plate negative
 

Hello all,

I recently acquired a glass-plate negative of Babe Ruth, with no additional details what-so-ever included. I was as excited to research the mystery of this image, as I was to acquire the negative itself.

I am hoping that there are some history buffs here that can help me corroborate or identify when and where this image originated, and possibly more details of how the negative itself was produced or came into existence.

Here is a pic the negative (taken on my phone, hence lack of detail):
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1698624321

Physical details:

• The negative is emulsion on a thin plate of glass.
• It measures about 2" x 3".
• The yellow area at the bottom is a very aged piece of what looks like masking tape.
• The photo is squared off on-plate, using what looks like black marker lines.
• Note - I took the image with my phone. There's a great deal more detail in the negative than my image suggests.

I've scoured the internet for info, which have been sparse. Here's what I've found so far:

• The 2x3 glass negative format possibly matches cartes de visite, or photo enlargers used in newspaper printing. Cartes de visite cameras mostly phased out by the end of the 1800's, although were still in very limited use into the 1920's, so can't be excluded as a possibility (although the exact size and shape may not match?). However, newspaper is a better fit for the characteristics of my piece (tape remnants, and marker lines).
• I've found that there aren't a lot of images of Ruth in game and in uniform, but hat-less. I thought that added a small amount of interest to my image.
• I did manage to find one (and only one) example of my same image. It can be seen on page 11 of a detailed report created in 2012 by Dave Grob (memorabilia authenticator), who used old images to authenticate a $4.4M Babe Ruth jersey. Links:
  • Report: http://haulsofshame.com/blog/wp-cont...e-Plates-1.pdf
  • Additional details: http://baseballresearcher.blogspot.c...s-used-to.html
• I used Photoshop to invert my negative, and overlay Grob's image (extracted directly from his report) over mine. The result is attached at the bottom of this post.
• Grob's image is cropped, and has been manually given an artistic look. In other words, heavily manipulated and stylized. My theory is that since my negative includes a great deal more of the jersey than the image Grob used, his must be the only known version of that image? Otherwise, considering it was used specifically to authenticate a jersey, he would have opted for a version with as much of the subject matter (jersey) as possible.
• Grob's report suggests that the image was taken at Comiskey Park in 1920.
• Based on the background, especially the characteristics of the wall behind Ruth, I believe it was taken at the same time as another image of Ruth and Joe Jackson seen on page 10 of Grob's report. Reinforces 1920 and Comiskey. That image is attributed to the New York Daily News, which is perhaps where mine came from. Link to that image: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Gz09PMiufj...0/photo-2a.jpg
• I believe both Grob's image and mine are copies of an original, for two reasons:
  1. Grobs is cropped and altered far more than mine. Suggesting that copies were made to be edited like this.
  2. Grob's image has a very small sliver of extra detail at the top of the image, beyond what mine has. Look close at the extended blurred hat to the left of Ruth's head in Grob's image, in my attached overlay. It's also possible that the area was masked off by the black marker on the glass plate of my negative.
• I believe Grob's image was used as a newspaper headshot, but it could also have been used for a collector card? I haven't been able to find it anywhere outside of his report.
• Based on the theory that the image is newspaper related, I went through hundreds (maybe thousands) of old newspaper page archives relating to Ruth. I focused mainly on Chicago and New York based newspapers, but also branched ut from there. I didn't find my image in any of them.

I would love to get some feedback from Grob himself, considering he is directly related to my only source. However, I'm not sure how to do that, or if it would even be appropriate to try and do so.

I welcome all feedback, including suggestions of what I should do with the negative.

Thank you!

My inverted negative image, with Grob's image overlayed. Apologies, the forum limits gif's to a 280px height. My original in photoshop is a much higher resolution.
Better resolution gif showing overlays
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1698624802

Wow... Based on continued research this evening, I just found that this negative is derived from the original image used at the top of the following card:
"1922 E121 American Caramel Babe Ruth (Photo Montage)"

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50016-56010.s

https://natedsanders.com/blog/wp-con...to-Montage.jpg

And used in the American Carmel Company advert for the 60 or 120 (?) card set.

https://www.oldsportscards.com/wp-co...eball-Card.jpg

What you’ve got there is a copy neg of a previously existing print.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hello TCMA, thank you for the feedback!

I'd assumed that the negative was a copy from the start. The question is, what is it copied from, and when? It's plate glass, high level of detail, and clearly aged based on the condition of the tape. I'm guessing from the 20's.

Do you know of a source image that contains all of the same area that's in my negative? My overlay animation (higher resolution version linked here) shows what my image contains, that's missing from my only known two original sources.

Should I resign myself to the fact that it's just a worthless copy? :-(

When you're talking about Babe Ruth, nothing is worthless!

Make some high quality prints and see if you can sell them. They'd be better quality than any ink jet printer stuff they sell on ebay for $5.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

That's an interesting suggestion Tim, and within my capabilities. However, wouldn't there be copyright to contend with?

Assuming I don't go the re-print route, any other suggestions from anyone on what to do with the negative? Sell, get graded(even possible?), further research, etc? If the full parent image no longer exists in print or negative form, it basically makes this a "1 of 1", I assume that would increase the value?

Considering that you'd only be doing a few, it probably wouldn't come up.
An actual IP attorney would be the way to go if you want to make a serious go of it, like hundreds of high quality prints instead of just a handful.
Not cheap but worth it.

As far as I know, it's pre 1923, so the image has become public domain, meaning you can use it.
But.... Some states especially NY have name image likeness laws that control how you can use an image of someone famous. So for example, a 1915 photo of a random factory league player can be used without much worry.
A 1920 Photo of Babe Ruth? Whoever is managing the licensing for his estate would probably have something to say about selling a lot of expensive prints, and maybe about just a handful of small cheap ones. (depending on how agressive they are)


A copy negative can still be a nice thing. And maybe valuable. TCMA would know a lot more.

Your copy was probably photographically "printed" from a larger format original. That's done to sort of protect the original, and allow distribution of different sizes that a place printing a magazine or newspaper or other publication would want based on their equipment.


As a collectible, it's in an odd place. Negatives are hard to display well, and part of the attraction of old photos is displaying them. But a glass copy negative is uncommon, even if it might not be unique.

Basically a photo of a photo.

2"x3" is a really small glass negative. Are you sure it's glass, and not acetate?

Either way, the smaller glass sizes tended to fall closer to the end of the glass negative era, somewhere in the 1930's or so.

If it can be definitively pinpointed as an early artwork stage to a specific product, publication or even card, you might have something there.

If it's just a random file copy with no idea as to it's purpose, it's a nice little collectible, though likely not worth a lot.

However if you somehow have convincing provenance tracing it back to the American Caramel Company, it would likely be worth thousands.

As far as reprinting possibilities, without even going into areas such as copyright and image likeness issues...I don't think there's any real potential market to be honest. There's already hundreds, if not thousands of crystal clear Babe Ruth shots available in some way shape or form to the general public. This is essentially a tiny 2nd generation neg that is likely not going to blow up very well. Probably served it's purpose for whatever it was originally used for, but not exactly great for art prints.

I've got an old metal file drawer full of maybe 1500+ old copy negs from boxing magazine publisher Stanley Weston. I've scanned several, and while they're likely just fine for inserting small printed photographs into articles in B&W newsprint boxing magazines of the era, they likely wouldn't serve much purpose beyond that.

steve B and D. Bergin, thank you for the great feedback!

It is most definitely glass, a bit less than 1/16th inch thick. The emulsion has a silvery appearance at a certain angle. The image changes to positive at that angle as well. It came with what appears to be an original protective cardboard. Additional images attached.

Looking closer, I agree with it being a copy of another print.

Does anyone recognize the image outside of the two sources I found? Especially, a version containing Ruth's full torso?

https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1698774433 https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1698774424

E121 Ruth holding bird source
 

Recently discovered that the "ONLY known original photograph" used for the "1922 E121 American Caramel Babe Ruth, Holding Bird" card was a 5.5x7.75 print sold by RMY Auctions in 2013:

• https://rmyauctions.com/bids/bidplace?itemid=21

The photo had some amazing provenance on back:

• First, it provides a wonderful explanation of the odd photo (releasing homing pigeons during a Sept 26th, 1921 Yankees/Cleveland game to provide inning by inning score updates!).
• Second, and more importantly for my research, it shows that the photo was N.E.A. (Newspaper Enterprise Association) sourced, stamped September 28, 1921.
  • This gives some potential context for my copy negative.
  • Could NEA have been the primary source for American Caramel card images?

Being the only known example of this photo, is encouraging as it suggests that there could have been very limited reproduction of other images used on the E121 cards outside of the Caramel set. Possibly, rights were signed over to American Caramel for these photos prior to card production? Purely speculation at this point.