I'm almost POSITIVE this card features Shoeless Joe...

[brett]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

I've had excellent correspondence with Mike Nola* several times and he is an expert on JJ. He helped me un-authenticate an item Heritage had mis-labeled (that was based on an erased date). I don't know specifically what his skills are in facial ID. I don't doubt that he feels certain about this image.

In my view, though your scan is a bit better - there still isn't nearly enough their for certainty. If I was advising an author looking for a JJ sliding photo for his book, I would tell him to find another. If the card was in a Library of Congress collection labeled as Lord and Tannehill, I would tell them to leave it that way. If an authenticator asked me if he should authenticate the image as JJ - I would say not.

If you study the subject, you will see an inherent bias against certainty that 2 faces are the same person when you really can't see one of them very well. That's because the mind has a tendency to fill in what you can't see - and not always correctly.

This is a lot more blurry than any image I have ever seen anyone try to seriously identify. I can point to a couple of barely discernable features that seem to be very similar to JJ, and as has been said, it can be JJ. That's where I would leave it unless the photo is found.

Enough already... It's Joe. You now have newspaper documentation and on top of everything else here's the word from somenbody who knows alot more about Joe Jackson than you or even me...
Hi Greg,

Thanks for your interest in Joe and for your comments about the card.

We showed the photo to our boss and Official Historian, Mike Nola and
he said there is no doubt in his mind, the photo is that of Joe
Jackson sliding into third. The hair style, the ears, the laugh
wrinkle (crease) on the left side of his face, the build....all give
it away.....it's Joe Jackson...end of debate!!! Mr Nola took the
photo into Photoshop and enhanced it as much as possible, he has no
doubts....it's Joe Jackson. If we were to dig into our archives, we
could probably tell you with some certainty the day the photo was
taken, but right now, we don't have that kind of time to research this
issue further.

Please do let us know if we can assist further in this matter.

Now you can admit that I'm right and let it go. I knew this when I started the post. The evidence is overwhelming and it's nice to know that I just made a valuable contribution to this board and the hobby.