Babe Ruth General Gum Sign/Display

[Shoeless Moe]

All, you may have seen this thread on the card side, now putting it up here in case you have not, and would appreciate any input.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=301689

At first glance it's "fake", and I too thought that before doing a double take and looking closer.

Some very knowledgeable Net54 collectors (Michael Trotnic, David Cycleback, etc.) have commented in that they feel it is authentic, and some have called it a Fake.

It would be best if you read that thread from beginning to end as there are some very interesting comments and useful tips for determining if certain memorabilia is authentic or not.

Please provide any comments you have, good, bad or ugly.

[drcy]

It is authentic and original.

[irishdenny]

Honestly... imho saying anything after what David "Cemented" would be difficult to do! Ive always Admired His Work & Knowledge!!!

* I do Hope that I'm not over stepping any boundaries here!?

A few years back I sent an item to David for His Approval...
I'm Not sure if David is still working in this area,
However that would be my 1st move (:

Please forgive me if I spoke out prematurely...

[drcy]

My very first impression from the funky staining and angled photos was it might be fake. Thus, I don't fault others who had that first impression.

[jerseygary]

I've followed this thread closely. I am a graphic designer and have studied the history of my profession over the years and an somewhat familiar with the way things were printed and made to work through the decades. Without seeing this piece in person, it's impossible for me to make a conclusion when it comes to the way it was printed.

I also create "period correct" props for movies and TV shows. I know from my own work that it is very easy for a trained person to make a modern piece look and feel "old" until it is thoroughly examined up close. I just did a group of circa 1933 cardboard soft drink, tobacco and candy display signs for a movie that is being filmed right now. Between my designs which use 1933-correct typefaces and colors and the prop master or set decorator who artificially aged the pieces on set, you would be hard pressed to say one way of the other if they were authentic or not until you have it in hand.

A few years ago I was asked by a major auction house to give my opinion on an incredibly large collection of baseball advertising pieces. This was a one man's entire collection, over 300 pieces ranging from the 1890s to the 1950s. He had amassed them over the previous thirty years. 99% were fake. Some were good fakes, while many were really poor 1980s color copy quality mounted to old cardboard. The old glue had dried out on some and you could actually see the graphics that were underneith on the original cardboard.

One thing that struck me were the sun faded shapes that were present on the backs of many of the fakes. This can't really be faked - but the graphics applied to the fronts can.

I was going both ways until I took a practical look at how a display header would have been used. When I did a model of the sign and tried to make the cut-out tabs work the way they are supposed to, it doesn't add up to me.

Here is my little exhibit to explain:

Screen Shot 2021-06-04 at 12.13.39 PM.jpg

Screen Shot 2021-06-04 at 12.13.58 PM.jpg

Screen Shot 2021-06-04 at 12.14.06 PM.jpg

See what I mean about the graphics and copy being cut off? It kind of defeats the purpose of having a header if you can't read the copy on it. Were there bad designers back in 1935? Absolutely. But a candy company that does many types of products each year that come with displays like this wouldn't have sent this to market designed this way. A competent designer would have designed around the tab problem and included more "empty space" to compensate for the mounting system.

Is this a definitive answer - no, but just more food for thought until someone gets a hold of this thing in real life...

[Butch7999]

Gary raises an excellent point -- yet, might it also explain the rarity, or really uniqueness, of this example?
Is it conceivable this was a test piece, a prototype, which in its day was quickly discovered to be an impractical,
poorly-conceived design, and was tossed back into the company's or the printer's archives without ever
being distributed to shopkeepers, or ever redesigned in a more functional form?
Separately, is it also conceivable it was meant to be suspended from something other than the back end
of a box -- some thin metal rod or something that would've held it just a few inches more visibly aloft?

[drcy]

Trey sent me microscopic images of the printing-- much clearer and more magnified than shown in this thread--, and it is definitely period and vintage.

[oldeboo]

Originally Posted by drcy

Trey sent me microscopic images of the printing-- much clearer and more magnified than shown in this thread--, and it is definitely period and vintage.

To expand on that only a little bit, but yes, I currently have the item in hand. Any remaining doubt has unequivocally vanished upon a more thorough examination.