1889 Gilbert & Bacon baseball cabinet id?

[Leon]

A friend sent this to me for id help. I don't know who it is but it is (or looks to be) an 1889 Gilbert & Bacon baseball cabinet. Any id help will be appreciated....

[z28jd]

It's Hank Gastreich

[Leon]

Originally Posted by z28jd

It's Hank Gastreich

you're good!! Thanks much!

[shernan30]

He played for the Columbus Solons in the 1889 season.

[Joe_G.]

Neat studio proof Leon. Very few OJs have a black copyright which I've always understood to be the result of scribing the copyright into the negative with a sharp point. What is a bit strange about this particular cabinet is the fact that the "D" in "COPYRIGHTED" appears it may extend onto the mount. I'm hoping this is an illusion since this would mean it was written onto this particular cabinet (not the negative) and then make the leap of explaining why the N172s have the same copyright (too far fetched to believe this proof was the exact card Goodwin & Co. based the N172 off of). Regardless of whether you follow my line of reasoning above, could you please confirm that the copyright is indeed all within the photo and part of the photo (ie not written onto this cabinet). Thank You!

[kkkkandp]

I don't know, Joe - it seems an awful lot like that one letter extends down to the mount. Looks like black ink on top of the image.

The photo of my Gilbert & Bacon cabinet of Gus Weyhing actually overlays the upper part of the G on the mount and has the Goodwin & Company embossing on the image itself (diagonally to the left of Gus' right knee and shin). Gus' name was also written on the mount, by a previous collector, I suspect. Finally, my mount does not have the street address that Leon's does.

[GoudeyGum]

Originally Posted by Leon

A friend sent this to me for id help. I don't know who it is but it is (or looks to be) an 1889 Gilbert & Bacon baseball cabinet. Any id help will be appreciated....

not sure...but I'm loving the black eye.

[Joe_G.]

If the copyright is in fact written on the cabinet card in black ink, it may suggest that Goodwin & Co. based their cards on actual studio proof cabinets as opposed to the original negative (at least in this case). This would mean Goodwin would have had to create a 1:1 size negative from the cabinet to be able to make N173s of their own. Now that I study the Proof next to the N172 of same pose, we can see the copyright is in two different locations which may further support a theory in which multiple proofs were made, some sent to Goodwin & Co. and they made the N172s based on these cabinets as opposed to the negative. Interesting . . . (to me)

On a side note, the cards are not mine, they belong to a fellow board member and I hope their use here is deemed acceptable.