1889 Boston Baseball Club Lithograph - Real or Fake?
 

Hi All,
Looking for opinions on this item that I just picked up. I have been collecting 19th century prints for several years now and have picked up a handful of original lithographs including a well known Prang print along with an 1888 large format Hastings print. I have provided scans below of this '1889' print. It does not display any multi-dot patterns at all and nice details under magnification although not as detailed as my larger format prints. This one is a small format measuring 12" x 9" and looks to be similar to this one offered REA several years back.

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2006/973.html

It's obviously in poor shape but still a really neat piece that will display nicely with my other prints. The foxing and thickness of the paper are consistent with 19th century prints but really would like some thoughts/opinions on whether or not this is the real deal. Thanks.

Looks very cool to me. As for whether it's real or fake, I would go with your gut, and if your gut says fake, it stilll looks cool.

Doug

It's typically found much larger, but based on the scan it certainly looks period. Probably needs a little more research. You might want to have that deacidified as it looks quite brittle.

I hope they're authentic, George. What incredibly cool pieces!

By the way, anybody else have the theme song from "Cheers" just pop into their head? :D

Thanks guys! I am leaning towards it being real given the paper thickness, foxing/staining, and clarity under magnification. Barry, yes that's a great suggestion re deacification and will take it to a conservator that has done some great work for me in the past (see below before and after).

If anyone else has thoughts on authenticity based on their experience, I'd love to hear it. I have handled a number of 19th century prints and paper but I am far from an expert :)

What do you guys think of this? It is the same picture as above, on older looking thick paper. It has a picture on the back of golfers. It's also a cool piece, just don't know how old or cool. Thanks for the help.

http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/x...o/IMG_1861.jpg

http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/x...o/IMG_1860.jpg

looks totally fake!

George:

I would go with fake

I do not think it is a vintage piece, most likely a more modern reproduction for sale as a poster, ad or something. The border seems a very modern touch, paper looks shiny and modern, I have never seen a vintage colorized G Walden Smith photo, and there is apparently something also printed on the back. Not necessarily fake, just modern.

Hi Guys,
The latest image that is in color is a reproduction. I've never been able to find the original source but it likely came out of some sort of publication in the earlier part of the 20th century. It should have a golf image on the other side and I've been told that there were several sporting themes that were included with it.

My original post shows what I believe to be the original lithograph. It is a small format print that was likely used as advertising for Jordan, Marsh and Co. I had some restoration done on it by Graphic Conservation out of Chicago...they also confirmed that it was a period piece.

George

Agreed, George, the original piece that you posted looks authentic to me.

George- I just bought a scrapbook today that has the color version included. The publication is called 'A Portfolio of Sporting Prints For the Devotees of the Manly Arts'. Included are golf, boxing, fishing, etc. prints. I'm not sure of the date of publication. The prints are actually quite beautiful.

I'd like to see magnified images of the details, but the first print looks as if it good be authentic.

Though I'm not sure they're lithographs.

I was thinking the color one looked similar to 1940's-1950's place mat and calendar type printing. To me it looks like it's an old reproduction from then. Better scans would help with that one.

Hi Gary,
Fantastic! Thank you for confirming the source of the color reproduction as I’ve been trying to find the title for a number of years. It’s 100% repro from 20th century and thin paper whereas the others are thicker stock.The small format print and large one (I own both) b/w are original prints.

George


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk