Showing off a custom cut signature booklet - Steinbrenner

[Woundedduck]

Had this done by a member on the FCB boards and thought some here might want to see it.




Was made from the following pieces:

[David Atkatz]

So a signed photo becomes a cut signature.

Great.

[GKreindler]

Woundedduck,

Do you have the final piece in hand? I'd love to see photos of the thing in real space.

Also, can you mention anything about its printing and/or construction?

Thanks!

Graig

[Woundedduck]

The photo was a Polaroid and a blurry, poor quality one at that. It wasn't the nicest presentation and I had no personal connection to it so having it cut up for this project was an easy decision.

I don't know all the details as far as production goes, but it's quite meticulously hand crafted. 200lbhockeyplayer was the creator over on FCB and his work is top notch. The only difference between this and something created by Topps is the logo. I'll try to get some in hand pictures when I can.

http://www.freedomcardboard.com/foru...77#post1715177

The above link is a thread where he shows his process a bit

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Woundedduck

The only difference between this and something created by Topps is the logo.

Quite true.

(I don't recall very much written here in defense of cutting up autographed items in order to shove cuts into cards.)

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Woundedduck

The photo was a Polaroid...

In other words, a one-of-a-kind photo.

[bbcard1]

I think it looks great! Good choices IMO to make combine some uninteresting pieces into something top notch.

[Mr. Zipper]

I'm not typically supportive of slicing and dicing, but this seems like a pretty worthy exception. Nice work and an improvement in my opinion.

[Exhibitman]

Beautiful! Turned a crappy polaroid into a work of art any Yankees fan would be proud to own.

[cubsfan-budman]

and its a one-of-a-kind relic now. even says so on the card.

i agree that the polaroid wasnt anything too special and the card is an improvement.

[David Atkatz]

The photo told a story. The "card" is a manufactured, meaningless, decoration.

[packs]

You mean like taking an original photo and turning it into a baseball card?

[Exhibitman]

The card tells a story of the man in the photo, with better images and quotes that really sum up his philosophy and his life's work. It may be sacreligious to some to ever change an atom of any collectible but as a fan and collector I far and away would prefer to own a work of art like this to a random snapshot of a middle-aged man in a hallway.

[David Atkatz]

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between a photo which can be duped millions of times, and a polaroid, which is a unique, one-of-a kind, original.
(And, of course, turning a photo into a baseball card does not damage or destroy the original photo. Just ask our fellow collectors who pay three figures for those type I photos which were used on cards.)
And then there's the fact that the polaroid was signed when taken, preserving a moment in time when a fan met the Boss.

But, hey, it is a beautiful, meaningless decoration.

[Cfern023]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

The photo told a story. The "card" is a manufactured, meaningless, decoration.

Yeah, the Poloroid is telling me someone caught him off guard and harassed him for an autograph after.

The card is nice, but an index card would have been perfect. I like it.

I wonder if I can find two index cards signed by my favorite 2 Marlins.

If the photo was something special, such as him behind his desk, or even hugging the guy who took it- then I understand. But the image isn't special to begin with, and you can find millions of photos of The Boss.

Those photos from before 1950 are sometimes the only item you can get of a guy who never was asked for his signature, and of a time when memorabilia wasn't mass produced. This Polaroid is an example of that "Instant Collectible" world we live in. Those old photos of the Babe and Gehrig are the antithesis of that.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Cfern023

This Polaroid is an example of that "Instant Collectible" world we live in. Those old photos of the Babe and Gehrig are the antithesis of that.

Is that so?

Tell me... In what respect does the signed Polaroid snapshot of Steinbrenner--preserving a chance meeting with a fan--differ from this snapshot of Ruth?



Or this blurry snapshot of Gehrig and Ruth? (It's so blurry--if it were mine I'd cut off the signatures and have a card made.)