| Archive |
05-04-2004 03:02 PM |
Old Judge Information (that may interest only me)
Posted By: <b>Tom L.</b><p>For the Old Judgeophiles:<BR><BR>Not sure if anyone noticed, but the Walzl's Imperial Cabinet Photo in the recent Robert Edwards auction, Lot 32 "Ununusual 1889 Goodwin Proof Cabinet," <BR><BR><a href="http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/site/bid/bidplace.asp?itemid=30&getauctionid=9#pic" target=_new>http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/site/bid/bidplace.asp?itemid=30&getauctionid=9#pic</a><BR><BR>featuring Brooklyn player Clark, actually has the identical background as that in every Baltimore Old Judge photo (except for those with team changes to Baltimore). <BR><BR>So what?<BR><BR>1. Walzl's was a Baltimore studio, which we know used a particular background for taking at least one Goodwin Proof photo.<BR><BR>2. Every Baltimore player appears with the exact same background.<BR><BR>3. It is thus logical to assume that Walzl's Studio took every Baltimore photo that appears in the Old Judge sets (1888-89). <BR><BR>[If not, then either:<BR>A. Goodwin Co. had the exact same background and happened to photograph all of the Baltimore players when in New York, using that same background; or,<BR>B. Goodwin Co. photographers took the train to Baltimore, borrowed Waltzl's' studio, and happened to select that background (both in 1888 and in 1889); or,<BR>C. The following confluence of events occurred: another studio has that exact background as Walzl's; the other studio also happened to subcontract from Goodwin Co. in taking baseball photos; and the other studio happened to have a Baltimore tie-in to be able to photograph every Baltimore player.] <BR><BR>[I believe it is much more likely that Walzl's was the photographer rather than that A, B, or C actually occurred.]<BR><BR>I may be the only one who cares (besides whoever actually bought Lot 32).<BR><BR>Tom
|
