|  | 
| 
 ruth photo ideas Trying to decide which type 1 photo to frame with my ruth auto. The auto was signed between 1947-48 most likely. Which do you think would look better or should I hold off for a better photo? Thanks for your input http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/q...ps0f2b7795.jpg http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/q...ps39459f54.jpg | 
| 
 Certainly not the one that shows how ill he was! | 
| 
 I would go with the first one.  I plan to do something similar with my Ruth autograph, using this photo: | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 I like the first photo. I've always been a fan of pairing a photo of the player signing autographs with an actual autograph (even if the item being signed in the photo is not the one framed with it). I think it makes for an interesting combination, almost like a wide-out shot, and then zooming in for the extreme close-up on the signature. Plus, any sharp period photo of Ruth in action during his playing days will stand well on its own, and in my mind, the separate signature becomes a distraction from the photo (or vice versa) rather than having an additive value. Maybe that's just me though :D | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Definitely the 1st photo.  Photo #2 is pretty tough on the eyes, FWIW. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Definitely the first one. It says "yeah, I was a big deal." | 
| 
 Neither. I would want Ruth in uniform in some way. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 You can't be serious with that 2nd photo.......... | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 You have Ruth's autograph for what he did as a player, not for his being sick and almost dead.  I understand why you would want a photo that relates as closely as possible to the actual autograph, but sometimes that doesn't make sense.  I also am not a fan of the framed pieces that have an autograph framed alongside a photo of the athlete as an old man, dressed in civilian clothes, regardless of how great they look for their age, unless they are golfers.   Or vice-versa - a photo of the athlete in his prime, framed with a signature from when they were so old they could barely sign their name.  It's just a matter of aesthetics. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 It might make a great piece if you can frame the autograph with the 'signing' photo, AND an 'in action' shot.  I had intended to choose between the two, but using both might work.  Here are a couple of ideas: | 
| 
 Joey, the first photo is a grade A.  Love it. The second one's good too, poignant, but the first is hard to beat. Especially for an autograph. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 I like the second photo, just think the first is better for an autograph. Joey's pick. I wouldn't have even asked this motley crew. | 
| 
 I was just joking when I said everyone here's motley.  I'm not motley. But every rose has a thorn. No, wait. I think that was White Snake. | 
| 
 Wasn't it Poison / Bret Michaels?  Not my thing, but an "ex" used to sing that song ad nauseum :( As for the photo, find one in Yankee Pinstripes! | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 That second display idea looks awesome! | 
| 
 Thanks Alex.  I have 8-10 mock-ups of various items, ready to build as soon as I get a man-room.  My girlfriend has demanded a pool table in the room - being a nice guy, I acquiesced. | 
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:23 PM. |