New Conlon photos from original negatives

[garymc]

Are these type of photo's collectable? A Conlon relative released some photos to a collector I know. Being a Highlander type 1 collector I'm somewhat hesitant to buy them......what is your opinion ????

https://www.flickr.com/photos/151843...57704575151952

[drcy]

Not sure what you're showing in the link, but for modern Conlon photos made from the original photos, I'd price them as display pieces not collectables or investments. If at a reasonable price, such items are perfect for display on your wall.

[garymc]

Let me explain myself clearer.... Mr. Conlons daughter printed out some photos from the original negatives, sometime around 1993. I believe these would be consider a type 2 photo. Is this correct ? If these are type 2 photos I might take the chance and buy them as the result of my passion of anything NY Highlander.

The link I showed was to my collection of type 1 photos, I was just showing them off



Sharing my Yankee’s............. https://www.flickr.com/photos/151843924@N04/albums
Share your Yankee’s............... https://www.facebook.com/groups/554519474738304/
Share your Yankee memorabilia ................... https://www.facebook.com/groups/2943...location=group

[Runscott]

Gary, I don't know about the 1993 prints, but there was a website that started around 2004 that was selling high-quality prints made from original Conlon negatives. They had a massive assortment available in different styles;i.e-silver gelatin, platinum, etc. I believe it John Rogers who bought the negatives and started the website. He had the printing done by a reputable company.

In any event, I ordered several Conlon prints from him when he offered a deal to Net54 members - high quality silver gel. If I liked them well enough I planned on trying out a platinum print. I still have the one of Rhoades in the outfield that was used for his T206. I imagine the quality of his were at least as good as those produced in the 1993 run by Conlon's daughter.

My analysis is that they are very nice but look nothing like a true old silver gelatin print, or even a 1960's Type 2. As David said, they are display pieces. I asked David 10+ years ago about the value of 2nd generation (and worse) photos and he told me that you couldn't go wrong paying what you would pay to hang it on your wall;i.e-forget about collectability. Since then I've bought a few prints that technically sound and well-composed, but not Type I.

[drcy]

If your story is correct, they would be type 2 and be considered something like "estate photos." There are such photos in the fine arts and such. Certainly collectible, but I don't know the prices, so can't comment on if they're a good deal.

[garymc]

The collectors photos are grouped with autographs, I'm talking price with him now. Not sure about buying them all.......

You can see them on this site.......Kevin Kerr is the seller and post is labeled "Highlanders"
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2943...location=group

My passion is collecting NY Highlander items and if this is a good item I want to get them all, I'v been talking to him for a couple days,

[drcy]

You have to join to see the stuff.

If it's a fair price and you want to buy it, go for it.

[lumberjack]

Conlon had no children. Conlon had no children.

The late John Siko, an old-time collector from Wilkinsburg, PA (where Bill McKechnie was born), had an opportunity to buy Conlon's negatives in the early 1940s. Siko passed on Conlon's personal offer and The Sporting News ultimately wound up with the negatives.

Conlon had no children.

John Rogers, of course, bought out the archive. He could tell a good story and is probably regaling his cellmates as we speak.

Anything printed by Rogers would be a terrific addition for someone who collected a particular team or player, but wouldn't have any monetary value.

Conlon had no children.
lumberjack

[garymc]

My mistake....they were George Brace photos from his daughter , printed from original negatives in the early 90's.......does this make them a type 2 photo ???

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by garymc

My mistake....they were George Brace photos from his daughter , printed from original negatives in the early 90's.......does this make them a type 2 photo ???

I highly doubt they’re off the original negatives if they’re done by brace of Highlander players. Burke/brace Printed prewar photos of duplicate negatives of conlon Van Hoyme and other photographers. The only way this can be off the original negative, as if somehow they got one of the original negatives from that era which I highly doubt based on what I’ve seen. They were obviously not the photographers of prewar images.

[garymc]

Thanks for all you impute and knowledge......always a learning experience !

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

I highly doubt they’re off the original negatives if they’re done by brace of Highlander players. Burke/brace Printed prewar photos of duplicate negatives of conlon Van Hoyme and other photographers. The only way this can be off the original negative, as if somehow they got one of the original negatives from that era which I highly doubt based on what I’ve seen. They were obviously not the photographers of prewar images.

What Ben said. I have seen a great many Burke/Brace 2nd and 3rd generation negatives that were re-shot from various print sources ranging from original photos all the way down to newsprint sources. While some are still quite nice, and produced attractive reprints, expanding the catalog of available player images appears to have been the primary concern. Restrikes from these 2nd generation negatives were available from George Burke in the 1930's and 40's, George Brace from the 1950's on, and his daughter took over print production as Brace's health failed in later years. She continued producing prints pretty much right up until Rogers "bought" the archive (I use quotes there, because he defaulted on the payments).

Because George Burke did not begin shooting baseball players until 1929, as Ben said, any negatives of Highlanders players that Mary had available in the 1990's would most likely have been 2nd generation when they were shot (photo of a photo). Any prints produced from those negatives in later years would technically be classified as Type 4. While they could still be fun additions to a Highlander fanatic's collection, I wouldn't expect them to have more than a nominal collector value.

[whitehse]

I have nothing to add in terms of value but I am still peeved about what happened to George Brace's work. I had a chance to talk to him several times when I worked at Wrigley in the early to mid-80's and he had some pretty incredible stories.

I ran across this photo of him along with other photographers at Wrigley when Stan Musial was honored by the team. Thats Mr. Brace at the top of the shotgun barrel that Stan the Man is holding. I saved it because you dont usually find pictures of him in action!

John Rogers needs to spend the rest of his life in prison for what he did to Brace's daughter alone.