Andrew's Conlons
Graded paper was rated from one to four. You were going from low contrast, 1,
to normal, to higher contrast (which was in the range of normal depending on the negative), to high contrast, 4. This isn't heavy stuff, I'm not a photographer and what I don't know is cosmic, but these are things you can pick up on.
Also, you could buy a set of filters (8), which would also change the contrast.
Both photos are from the original negative, IMO. Conlon was foxing around with his prints. I have Conlon 8x10s c. WW I, that fill the range from low contrast to high.
RMY said something recently that grabbed me. If a photographer took a shot, then printed the image himself from the original negative, what difference does it make as to the year (warning: I have a dog in this fight). It can get start to get dicey if the image was printed by someone in the orbit of the original photographer. Or, as another example, the Library of Congress has all the FSA negatives. They can give you an archival print, a pristine image, that is pleasing to the eye, a nice piece of history and something you can hang on the wall, but worthless as an object of speculative value. Sure wish Jim Rowe was still sellin' these things for a dollar a piece at the Troy, Michigan shows.
We have been talking in private about H Yee's grading system, which seems to be based on the back stamps of news service photographs. It's kind of mind staggering; the guy must have looked at ten thousand images. He doesn't say much about the work of the pioneer photographers other than elementary bios and reproductions of their work. For example, Conlon used at least four back stamps and two variations of his signature. Often there is no ID at all. He reprinted the photos for years. For example....
Steven Gietschier, the archivist at TSN, was of the opinion that Conlon created the second negative for Cobb/Austin, the one that added the gravy-stain baseball, because he was relatively deluged with requests for the image. I think the fake baseball is a distraction, but if Conlon signed the image, what does that do to its value. Another long story.
Henry, you don't know me, but please give us your opinion. Somebody wanna call Henry....
Back to Andrew. In the case of the unknown A's pitcher, one image may be worth more to a buyer due to its contrast or its condition, but they were probably printed about the same time. Fine.
lumberjack
|