TCMA "The 1930's" & Glass Plate Negatives
 

In 1972 TCMA began issuing "The 1930's" set in separate series of 24 cards each. 21 series were eventually issued for a total of 504 cards.

"The 1930's" was made possible by utilizing an enormous collection of glass plate negatives my father purchased from an antique dealer in Greenwich, CT in 1969. These glass plate negatives date from the 1920's - 1940's and were used to create several TCMA issued cards and sets.

We've still got access to the entire collection of glass plate negatives and I would love to see these images offered to collectors once again. Modern prints created using these negatives are absolutely gorgeous and, aside from three or four, have never been offered in any format other than the 2" x 3" cards from 1972 or standard size cards scattered throughout TCMA's history.

Creating a set of new cards is essentially out of the question but a series of prints can be done with the proper licensing from MLB. 5x7's may be doable but certainly 8x10's are an option.

Given the fact that we'd be limited to photographic prints, I'm considering releasing 4 prints per month with a Limited Edition of 100 - 200 prints each, all hand numbered. As long as there's interest we can print close to the entire run of 504 images, though that would take quite some time.

I'd be open to brainstorming about any other suggestions. Curious to hear what you, as collectors, have to say.

As a teaser, here is one of the glass plate negatives and a positive image which I simply inverted the colors on. Should provide a pretty good idea of the potential here. Of course, a scanned image handled by the pros would be even better than this.

Hal Schumacher and Lefty Gomez during the 1936 World Series:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8200/2...7a242831_z.jpg

https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8128/2...e8ea2424_z.jpg

A 1972 TCMA "The 1930's" card of the same image:

https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8403/2...06028e2e_z.jpg

More cards from this issue:

https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8059/2...b90bddca_c.jpg

https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7541/2...7788b54a_c.jpg

https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8490/2...de1b4124_c.jpg

https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8849/2...bcfd6afc_c.jpg

https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8445/2...e5864449_c.jpg

Cool plates. Have you looked into the cost of the MLB licensing fee?

These would be produced through Photo File, who has the licensing.

Postcard Sized Version , With Borders Possible ?
 

..I'd love to see a version of those gorgeous pictures printed with a narrow white border so us centering weenies would have something to agonize over and kvetch about..


..http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/204295...HARDER_NEW.JPG

..sort of similar to the 1930's Gold Medal Wheaties or Worch Cigar style , as an optional design and size...good luck with this ; fascinating concept : new old cards !

..

Is there a babe ruth glass plate ?

Copyright lasts 75 years for "works for hire" (e.g. August 24, 1941) or life of the author (e.g. photographer) plus 50 years for non-"works for hire" so most of these negatives should be public domain, no?

Edited to add: Not sure why you would need an MLB license without copyright protection. Maybe Paul can add something . . . .

the look awesome, but if the were not card size, I wouldn't have any interest.

I don't think they are considered public domain but this stuff gets murky at best when trying to determine what is allowed and what is not. At the very least we've got licensing from MLB that allows us to use the team logos.

Rights to sell and profit from photos printed of the individual players comes down to their Rights of Publicity based upon which state they passed away in, and if their Rights of Publicity are still in tact we would need to have individual deals with each players estate in order to cover ourselves.

So, there are some players we just might not be able to do, like Joe Dimaggio unfortunately, because he passed away in California and his Rights of Publicity are still in tact. So, his estate makes the rules and Photo File does not currently have a deal with them.

Thanks for the input! Definitely, I would want them to be bordered but I think we're going to have to stick to standard sizes due to licensing restrictions. Even 5x7's might be pushing it. Project would have to be approved by MLB, so we'll see what they come back with once we're ready to move forward.

In the glass plate negative archive at Photo File there is at one that I know of but it wasn't part of "The 1930's" set. It's Ruth in street clothes going through a turnstile.

Here is another example of what is possible with these glass plate negatives. This is one of the few from the collection currently offered by Photo File and it does a good job of showing the difference in quality from the original cards to a modern print, even if this is a low-res scan:

https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8470/2...6331c1c0_z.jpg

https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8041/2...b2a3a679_z.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8189/2...de4b3dd1_z.jpg

Interesting, id love to see it, if you come across it!

Also.. Since its not part of the 1930's set... Will u be making a card of this image?

We would not make a print of this shot for the proposed issue I'm considering, since it's not part of "The 1930's" set. Something we could definitely offer separately though.

Here is the image. This particular print was created directly from the glass plate negative, likely in the late 80's or early 90's:

https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8899/2...cc98b575_c.jpg

Wow, very cool andrew! Thanks for posting it. I have never seen that image before.

The standard foil MLB licensing sticker and the photofile and other logos at the bottom would be problems for me.

On
 

It seems crazy to me that heirs can cash in on the likeness of a famous deceased relative in perpetuity but sounds like you know your stuff. Thanks for the response.

This is a good point. We would have to include the Photo File logo, likely the Cooperstown Collection logo, and the hologram might NOT have to be included. I create 8x10 cards in Limited Editions of 2000 every summer for the new HOF Inductees and we are not required to use holograms on those. So, we'll see.

MLB also does have a smaller hologram that perhaps we can use if it comes to that. I've seen it present on several licensed products and it's considerably smaller than what we currently use for 8x10's and enlargements.

Logo and hologram restrictions
 

Are you only allowed to have the logos and, if required, holograms on the front? If you put them on the back, would it qualify as something you are not licensed to produce (like a card)?

Topps is the only MLB licensed card maker. Other companies make cards but sans MLB logos. I am sure there are a myriad of licensing/estate issues.

Here are some of the first samples I had made up. Obviously, a lot can change throughout the creative process and this may not be representative of the final product. Should be pretty close though:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8152/2...7be8e44b_z.jpg

https://c3.staticflickr.com/9/8543/2...3e0d5689_z.jpg

Sounds like a really cool project.

I like the samples, the logos aren't all that intrusive.

Does photofile make actual photographic prints from them, or digital prints? Maybe a combination using a new negatve produced digitally?

I'm not a huge fan of purely digital prints, There just isn't enough track record with them to know If I'm getting something that will be nice a few years from now or something that's just fading from age.

Steve B

Nice looking photos. I used to purchase original photos from the daughter (perhaps wife) of George Brace. Unfortunately, Brace sold out to I believe Getty.

They will be professional quality photo prints of digitized images. First the negatives are scanned and digitized, cleaned up by our art department and cropped to fit standard dimensions, appropriate logos applied, etc.

Final prints are professional quality photo prints on Fuji photo paper.

More cards from the original set :cool: :

https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8510/2...f3b6e50f_c.jpg

And another one of the few images from the set that is currently being offered by Photo File:

http://www.photofile.com/Original/AA/DB/aadb028.jpg

After digging into this a bit more it seems likely we'll be able to place the logos and hologram (if necessary) on the outside of the package and not on the prints themselves.

My thinking is they could then be offered four or five at a time in a pack this way. We'll release one pack a month and if things are going smoothly maybe we start with another TCMA set that utilized the glass plate negatives.

Interested to know what your preferences would be for the following:

Hand numbering:
Would you prefer this to be on the front or the back of each print?

Set card number:
From my research it looks like we'll be able to use about half of the original images. This is due to licensing and legal restrictions etc.

Because this issue of prints will be a direct descendant of the original "The 1930's" set of 504 cards, would you prefer each print to include the original corresponding card number from the 1972 release? Or would you prefer all new numbering, starting with #1?

For example, Jimmy Foxx is card #120 in the original set. We could place that on the front of each print made from the same glass plate negative. Keep in mind that we will likely not be able to use every image from the original set. Thus, the run of new prints may never be "complete" with 504 prints corresponding to the original 504 cards.

"The 1930's" logo:
Would you like to see this logo/lettering on the front of each print as shown in the samples? Or would you prefer it not be there at all? The only other lettering on the front of each print would be the print/card number in small type, players name and team in small type, and potentially the hand numbering.

I think new numbering would be better, as collectors unfamiliar with The 1930's set would be confused with the missing numbers.

-Owen

I think the hand numbering should probably go on the front. If it's done as low key as the logos on the samples I don't see it being a problem at all. On the back would be a bit odd, more like a card and less like an art print. These seem more like art prints to me.

Either way would be cool. The point that new buyers might be confused by skip numbering is a good one. It would probably take a really great marketer to make the skip numbering a thing that draws people to the older set. And unless you've got a bunch of old inventory it seems unproductive.
On the other hand, going with the original numbers would allow a bit of sensible expansion in the future if some images that are currently off limits become available. The pull of having a relative in a great set of memorabilia prints might eventually trump the potential licensing fees or an unwillingness to license.

I don't think the logo is overly noticeable on the samples. I sort of like it. Even done a bit smaller but less hidden would be ok. Maybe a very thin white outline to keep it from getting lost against dark backgrounds?
I'm sure Photo File has some limit as to how small they're willing to go with their logo. That's all stuff for the graphic artists, and from the samples and the current one shown they do a nice job.
If the location is one where the logos could be matted out easily that would probably be attractive to some buyers. Of course that goes against the whole purpose of having a logo at all so maybe not the right course.


Steve B

If they are to be packaged 4 or 5 to a pack, perhaps the correlation of the new numbering to the previously-issued 1930's set would best be handled with a sheet inserted in each pack? That way, you could avoid the skip-numbering on the photos themselves, and also give an idea of what is to come for those unfamiliar with the 1930's set. I'm thinking something along the lines of a full 1930's set listing in a lighter/gray text, with the enlargements produced so far in black or bolded. If the numbers differ, the previous number and new number for each could be listed and updated as new issues are added. The ones that will not be reproduced could be tagged with an asterisk and note of "not anticipated to be reprinted" or some such, so that collectors who are familiar with the 1930s set don't keep holding out for those that are fated never to be reproduced.

As far as any markings on the photos, I've never been a fan of any markings on the face of a photo unless it's an autograph. That's me speaking as more of a photo guy than a card guy though, and rarely dealing with modern reprints, so I'm not sure I'd be your target demographic either way. I do think that a nicely-produced RPPC set would be neat though, especially if produced with a matte or silk finish rather than glossy, but would that be getting too close to the taboo trading card issue that Topps has locked up?

Do you have any photos/negatives of William/Bill McGee (St. Louis Cardinals pitcher 1935-1941 and NY Giants pitcher1941-1942)?

Hi Steve, thanks a lot for your input. Agreed, I think this is the best option.

I'd love if we can get away with minimal logos/printing on the front but "The 1930's" logo is something I wouldn't mind having. I'm torn as to whether or not player names and teams should be on there as well. Or, perhaps just the set number and then inside each package is a sheet with player names/teams corresponding to each number.

Absolutely, Photo File has a great team of graphic artists and they'll be the ones handling the scanning of the glass negatives and whatever artwork is required. After further conversations it seems likely the appropriate logos can be placed on the outside of our packaging, which would be ideal :) .

[/QUOTE]This is something that might work, as I'm leaning towards using the original set numbers. Part of our marketing will be that these images and glass plate negatives were used for the original set in 1972 and they're closely related. There are also some glass plate negatives in the collection that were NOT used in the 1972 set of some of the same players. We could offer those as exclusives, or variations etc. Lots of possibilities for those.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, our license doesn't allow us to produce postcards. I suppose that's too close to producing "cards" and not photos.

If he was in "The 1930's" set we'll have his glass plate negative. Even if he wasn't in the set it's possible we've got access to his images. I'll have to check Photo File's archive and get back to you :) .

I am not sure if he was in the set or not. Please send me a PM if you have something of him. Thank you so much.

Andrew---Any chance you have a GPN of Mort Flohr? He pitched for the Connie Mack's A's in 1934 only---a cousin of mine.

Very possible but I won't know until I start really sifting through the collection. There are hundreds of negatives and not all of them are in alphabetical order at the moment. Will add him to my list of requests :) .

So far our thinking has been to do 5x7 prints but now 4x5 looks plausible. Hopefully I will have some samples to share soon :cool: .

Try measuring the original size of your negatives.

4x5 is an aspect ratio of 0.80

whereas

5x7 is an aspect ratio of 0.714

The closer you match the original aspect ratio of your negatives, means there would be lesser of the picture that would get cropped off. I am sure you have thought of that already but thought I'd share my thought. ^.^

Finally have some sample images to share. These scans were taken directly from the glass plate negatives and have not had any post-processing work done yet.

As mentioned previously, there are hundreds more where these came from:

https://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5764/3...ff674613_o.jpg

https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8664/3...f4b0cfd8_z.jpg

https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5668/3...fe11fe83_z.jpg

[QUOTE=TCMA;1597332]Finally have some sample images to share. These scans were taken directly from the glass plate negatives and have not had any post-processing work done yet.

As mentioned previously, there are hundreds more where these came from:


Those are great.

Thanks, I'm still doing more research to try and figure out who the photographer was. I do believe I've nailed down the fact that the negatives came from The New York World Telegram, which was once the New York Evening Telegram, the same paper that Charles Conlon shot for. When I'm able to get down to the New York Public Library I should be able to dig up more info. At least I hope so.

Finally got some new prints created, thought you guys might like to see:

Daffy Dean, Chief Hogsett, and Hal Schumacher warming up before Game 2 of the 1936 World Series. Sam Leslie far right, second photo. Dick Bartell jumping at the Polo Grounds.

https://c8.staticflickr.com/6/5802/3...9a5bae80_c.jpg

https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5342/3...053dd82c_c.jpg

https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5601/3...ffef948b_c.jpg