Posted By:
Tom L.For the Old Judgeophiles:
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,"
http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/site/bid/bidplace.asp?itemid=30&getauctionid=9#pic
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).
So what?
1. Walzl's was a Baltimore studio, which we know used a particular background for taking at least one Goodwin Proof photo.
2. Every Baltimore player appears with the exact same background.
3. It is thus logical to assume that Walzl's Studio took every Baltimore photo that appears in the Old Judge sets (1888-89).
[If not, then either:
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,
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,
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.]
[I believe it is much more likely that Walzl's was the photographer rather than that A, B, or C actually occurred.]
I may be the only one who cares (besides whoever actually bought Lot 32).
Tom