A photo mystery

[thecatspajamas]

A little late to the party, but here's my take:

The OP's photo is dated 1955, and as others have stated, appears to have been issued in conjunction with a retrospective of the original event. The date stamping and notation of "wirephoto" on the paper caption are consistent with the photo having been sent "over the wire," with the OP's print being what came out on the other end of the wire. This would make it a Type IV photo: a duplicate photo printed more than 2 years after the image was shot. If the OP's photo is examined closely under magnification, the striations or "lines" that form the image should be able to be discerned. For more info on wirephotos, there is a ca. 1937 film on the wirephoto process here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LetlcmqZFyA

The photo on eBay has a dated paper caption and back stamping consistent with what the Associated Press used circa 1939. It would be considered a Type I photo, produced from the original negative within a short period after the image was shot.

Since both photos were issued by the Associated Press, and the cropping varies on each, it would seem reasonable that the AP held the original negative. They cropped/enlarged a portion of the image for the original photo on eBay which was sent to subscribers through the mail or by courier. About 16 years later, they pulled the negative out of the files, produced another print from it (utilizing more of the available image area to do so), and sent that image out "over the wire" to their subscribers to use with the retrospective story. The editor at the receiving end then added crop marks to the OP's photo to indicate what portion of the image he wanted to run with the story for that particular publication.

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

If the OP's photo is examined closely under magnification, the striations or "lines" that form the image should be able to be discerned.

Thank you for your input and taking the time to help.

Strange thing is though, there are no striations or "lines" in the photo. I know about the "lines" and looked for them with a 40x lighted loupe before purchasing the photo. I have a few other photos and have seen the transmission striations you are referring to before. So I have a good idea what they look like. There aren't any lines on the 1939 WS photo. I should have mentioned this in my original post.

I took some time and looked more closely at the paper caption on the back. Some of the edges are lose and there is more writing underneath the paper caption.

Could it be possible that my photo is an original that was reused in 1955 for a story since the Yankees were about to begin playing in the World Series? Or could the paper caption have been added later when the photo was reused? Keeping mind the dates on the back of my photo. September 26 & 27, 1955.

The first game of the 1955 World Series was held on September 28, 1955.

Thanks again for your help.

Jantz

[drcy]

It looks like a wirephoto to me, but it is possible it is a wirephoto from 1939. The clipping and date stamp could be from a later re-usage of the photo.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Could it be possible that my photo is an original that was reused in 1955 for a story since the Yankees were about to begin playing in the World Series? Or could the paper caption have been added later when the photo was reused? Keeping mind the dates on the back of my photo. September 26 & 27, 1955.

I do not think so. While it is possible that a photo sent over-the-wire could have been held in the receiving subscriber's archives and reused years later, that does not appear to be the case here. The upside down date stamp, with time stamp, appears to be when the print was produced (i.e. when the duplicate rolled off of the wire photo apparatus on the receiving end), with the stamp above that being the date stamp applied when the photo was filed in the subscriber's archives. Also, had it been an original that was pulled from the subscriber's archives and reused, the credit line would not state "wirephoto" which was a term that the AP used specifically for their wire photo process and service.

Even absent any visible striations (which I will take your word for, as I cannot tell from my phone's screen), I stand by my earlier assessment that yours is a Type IV wire photo produced in 1955. Let me also be clear that I am not trying to disparage your photo in any way, but rather just trying to help you understand what you have. What value and level of desirability you place on it is up to you, as with many photos, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think it would be neat to have both versions as a paired piece for comparison/contrast.