June 2012 Pick-Ups

[toppszl1]

Nice Brooks jersey ksfarmboy

[ksfarmboy]

Originally Posted by toppszl1

Nice Brooks jersey ksfarmboy

Thanks Toppsz and Jimmy. Lots of great pickups this month by everyone. Can't wait to see what you guys will post next.

[CarltonHendricks]

Picked up this c1864 engraving on eBay this afternoon... titled "FOOT BALL" in the original frame.....It's a monster at 43" wide x 24" tall...I actually have a copy that needs framed and a little restoration...but this one's framed and ready to go on the wall.

[thekingofclout]

This arrived in yesterday's mail. I'm really excited about this piece. It's a 1964 TOPPS 'Case' shipping box (with the orig shipping label still affixed) that was home to 24 boxes of The Beatles 2nd Series Wax Packs. Hard to imagine any others surviving the last 48 years, but I'm sure glad this one did!

Beatles-Topps-Empty-Case-Box-1.jpgBeatles-Topps-Empty-Case-Box-2.jpg

Beatles-Topps-Empty-Case-Box-4.jpgBeatles-Topps-Empty-Case-Box-3.jpg

[MGHPro]

Picked up a nice Joe Jackson Clark Griffith bat.

[GasHouseGang]

Don't own much of anything other than cards, but picked this up on ebay since it had the set of 12 cards including the Babe Ruth/Tom Mix card.

[Shoeless Moe]

Matt - very nice bat - I bowed out at about $2200

[Brian Van Horn]

OT.

[Lordstan]

I picked this one up off ebay.
I'm not sure if I should call this a type 2 or 4, and would like some opinions.
The earliest date stamp combined with the paper mean the pic was not printed near the time of the even, Hence type 2 or 4.
The thing that trips me up is the detail in the picture. If the print is from the original neg, it would be a 2. If from a copy negative, a type 4.
One of the things that really drew me to it was the image quality. It certainly doesn't look blurry, like a typical copy negative print.
The price was right, so it isn't that important to me that it has to be a type 2. Any opinions?

[GrayGhost]

My friends Super talented daughter when she was 15 did this for me. Kinda goes w the previous post

[David Atkatz]

My Kreindler:

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

My Kreindler:

David,

I don't believe that I've seen your Kreindler Iron Horse before, but it's nothing less than spectacular! Congrats!

You must love displaying it on your wall...

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by thekingofclout

I've put mine side by side with yours Mark, so you can compare them.

Attachment 67692Attachment 67693

Jimmy,
I looked at yours a couple of days ago to compare. I think it's pretty close. I focused on 3 spots. I looked at the pinstripes, the forehead, and the thumb of the hand by his face.
My pic's pinstripes a crisp and sharp as are yours.
Both foreheads have great detail in the wrinkles. Mine has more brightness washout by his hairline. Is this because it's a picture of a picture or differences in the way the pictures were developed? I don't know.
In your pic, the wrinkles on the joint of his thumb aren't very clear. On mine, you can each one. How could a copy image have more detail than the original?

As I said, it doesn't matter to me as a collector which it is, I am just looking for some education on this.

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

My Kreindler:

David,
This is a great painting. I think you showed a pic of this on your wall, a couple years ago.
How big is it?

Best,
Mark

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

I picked this one up off ebay.
I'm not sure if I should call this a type 2 or 4, and would like some opinions.
The earliest date stamp combined with the paper mean the pic was not printed near the time of the even, Hence type 2 or 4.
The thing that trips me up is the detail in the picture. If the print is from the original neg, it would be a 2. If from a copy negative, a type 4.
One of the things that really drew me to it was the image quality. It certainly doesn't look blurry, like a typical copy negative print.
The price was right, so it isn't that important to me that it has to be a type 2. Any opinions?

I've put mine side by side with yours Mark, so you can compare them.

1939LGDayRetirementTears.jpg1939gehrigday2.jpg

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

I picked this one up off ebay.
I'm not sure if I should call this a type 2 or 4, and would like some opinions.
The earliest date stamp combined with the paper mean the pic was not printed near the time of the even, Hence type 2 or 4.
The thing that trips me up is the detail in the picture. If the print is from the original neg, it would be a 2. If from a copy negative, a type 4.
One of the things that really drew me to it was the image quality. It certainly doesn't look blurry, like a typical copy negative print.
The price was right, so it isn't that important to me that it has to be a type 2. Any opinions?

Mark,
Great photo regardless of what Type it is. Congrats!

[Brian Van Horn]

I love flea markets:

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

I love flea markets:

Brian,
Isn't that HOF Ernie Lombardi receiving the trophy?

[Lordstan]

Yes it is Scott.
Also 2 people to the right of him is Mel Ott.
thanks for the nice words about Lou.
Mark

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

Brian,
Isn't that HOF Ernie Lombardi receiving the trophy?