To be or Not to be the Wright Bros. Photo

[Directly]

Thread has changed direction sorry--I didn't another member did!

[bgar3]

I am sorry in advance, as I try to avoid the back and forth controversial threads, but I legitimately can’t tell if you are kidding or not. That does not depict Harry and George Wright. Aside from not looking like them, that is not the uniform of the 1869-70 Red Stockings and those are the only years George played for them.

[Leon]

The one on the right is Joe Jackson's dad.

.

[bobbyw8469]

Why is the logo right side up on one guy and upside down on the other?

[Directly]

Hey, believe me no feeling hurt -- -The Cincinnati Reds are, of course, America’s oldest professional baseball team. While baseball was being played as far back as the late 1850s, it was the Cincinnati Red Stockings, FOUNDED in 1866, that were the first team to pay every player on their roster beginning in 1869.

Great information concerning George, so did the Red Stocking use the same emblem in 1866 or even have a logo emblem up to and including 1869?

[Directly]

The tintype, also known as a melainotype or ferrotype, is a photograph made by creating a direct positive on a thin sheet of metal coated with a dark lacquer or enamel and used as the support for the photographic emulsion. Tintypes enjoyed their widest use during the 1860s and 1870s, but lesser use of the medium persisted into the early 20th century and it has been revived as a novelty and fine art form in the 21st.

Tintype portraits were at first usually made in a formal photographic studio, like daguerreotypes and other early types of photographs, but later they were most commonly made by photographers working in booths or the open air at fairs and carnivals, as well as by itinerant sidewalk photographers. Because the lacquered iron support (there is no actual tin used) was resilient and did not need drying, a tintype could be developed and fixed and handed to the customer only a few minutes after the picture had been taken.

The tintype photograph saw more uses and captured a wider variety of settings and subjects than any other photographic type. It was introduced while the daguerreotype was still popular, though its primary competition would have been the ambrotype.

The tintype saw the Civil War come and go, documenting the individual soldier and horrific battle scenes. It captured scenes from the Wild West, as it was easy to produce by itinerant photographers working out of covered wagons.

It began losing artistic and commercial ground to higher quality albumen prints on paper in the mid-1860s, yet survived for well over another 40 years, living mostly as a carnival novelty. [1]

The tintype's immediate predecessor, the ambrotype, was done by the same process of using a sheet of glass as the support. The glass was either of a dark color or provided with a black backing so that, as with a tintype, the underexposed negative image in the emulsion appeared as a positive. Tintypes were sturdy and did not require mounting in a protective hard case like ambrotypes and daguerreotypes.

[bgar3]

Tom, the emblem in your tintype does resemble the Red Stocking one, I will try to match it up more accurately. I will check my copy of Ellard to see about other years, but off the top of my head I don’t remember any socks like that. Harry was on the team before George, but I do not see him in the tintype. I am also curious about the reverse logo on one, but not the other.

[jpop43]

The mystery of the reversed lettering stems from the fact that the player simply affixed the detachable bib panel upside down when he put his shirt on.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Directly

The tintype, also known as a melainotype or ferrotype, is a photograph made by creating a direct positive on a thin sheet of metal coated with a dark lacquer or enamel and used as the support for the photographic emulsion. Tintypes enjoyed their widest use during the 1860s and 1870s, but lesser use of the medium persisted into the early 20th century and it has been revived as a novelty and fine art form in the 21st.

Tintype portraits were at first usually made in a formal photographic studio, like daguerreotypes and other early types of photographs, but later they were most commonly made by photographers working in booths or the open air at fairs and carnivals, as well as by itinerant sidewalk photographers. Because the lacquered iron support (there is no actual tin used) was resilient and did not need drying, a tintype could be developed and fixed and handed to the customer only a few minutes after the picture had been taken.

The tintype photograph saw more uses and captured a wider variety of settings and subjects than any other photographic type. It was introduced while the daguerreotype was still popular, though its primary competition would have been the ambrotype.

The tintype saw the Civil War come and go, documenting the individual soldier and horrific battle scenes. It captured scenes from the Wild West, as it was easy to produce by itinerant photographers working out of covered wagons.

It began losing artistic and commercial ground to higher quality albumen prints on paper in the mid-1860s, yet survived for well over another 40 years, living mostly as a carnival novelty. [1]

The tintype's immediate predecessor, the ambrotype, was done by the same process of using a sheet of glass as the support. The glass was either of a dark color or provided with a black backing so that, as with a tintype, the underexposed negative image in the emulsion appeared as a positive. Tintypes were sturdy and did not require mounting in a protective hard case like ambrotypes and daguerreotypes.

History and Technology Overload

Love it keep it coming

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by bgar3

I am sorry in advance, as I try to avoid the back and forth controversial threads, but I legitimately can’t tell if you are kidding or not.

Yes, he's kidding. This is a jab at the other thread.

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Yes, he's kidding. This is a jab at the other thread.

I do not think that he is kidding.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=163481

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=307547

[brianp-beme]

I know I am not kidding when I say kidding is nothing to kid about.

Brian

[Directly]

Steve thanks for your very good facial comparisons I appreciate your taking time I totally agree with your assessment.

A few years ago I was thrown under the bus when I posted a cabinet baseball photo for authentication. It took a lot of time, with trial and error to prevail. Its frustrating but I dismissed all the negative feedback as good leading me to different paths to research.
Yup, not being disrespectable the experts can make mistakes.

With my Tintype the emblem being very similar to the Red Stocking sparked my curiosity.--No harm intended.--thanks

[Directly]

Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure

I do not think that he is kidding.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=163481

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=307547

You brought it up, I wasn't going to-just another good example how you and your expert made a documented bad judgement error. your expert screwed the pooch--please get him on here --

[robertsmithnocure]

I am not following. I thought that you said that your photo was the 1879 team with Comiskey and Radbourn?

[OldOriole]

Nevermind.

[chalupacollects]

In my expert opinion “or not” this is a quite confusing thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

I don't understand this one. You say that the photo is dated 1881. Do you know that date is 100% accurate? If so, how? Assuming it is though, you mention that "Comiskey" would have been 22 and "Quinn" would have been 19. But the boys in that photo are no where near those ages. The boy identified as "Quinn" is extremely young. He's probably between 10-12 years old here. The boy identified as "Comiskey" is a few years older, but still probably only 13-15 years old. A 22 year old is a young man, fully grown. The subjects in this photo are boys, not young men. They are young teenagers at most. Either your date is wrong or the identities are wrong.

[Directly]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't understand this one. You say that the photo is dated 1881. Do you know that date is 100% accurate? If so, how? Assuming it is though, you mention that "Comiskey" would have been 22 and "Quinn" would have been 19. But the boys in that photo are no where near those ages. The boy identified as "Quinn" is extremely young. He's probably between 10-12 years old here. The boy identified as "Comiskey" is a few years older, but still probably only 13-15 years old. A 22 year old is a young man, fully grown. The subjects in this photo are boys, not young men. They are young teenagers at most. Either your date is wrong or the identities are wrong.

First let me say I'm the expert on this photo--not you or anyone else---years ago a very qualified expert studied this photo and confirmed Comiskey, he has more knowledge in his finger tip than several experts on here put together--so you were there is 1881 to see what Quinn or Comiskey looked like--no offense but you really don't know what your talking about --honestly after reading some of your opinion on another links where you really believe someone is someone without a ounce of documentation and doesn't even remotely look then --then you come on here and try to tell me something like he is too young or some other type of crap- --so you studied the my photo for what one hour, 3 days, one month, a year, five years --I have been studying and researching this photo for 30 years and only recently discovered its dated so PLEASE don't come on here an try to tell me anything--I have a note book full of research including correspondence with Comiskys descendance-- so best stick with the other thread and rant--thanks for your opinion because it doesn't really mean a hill of beans to me and no offense it never will-------you can go to the highest mountain top and tell everyone I said this, including Mr. King Expert--you know why --I really don't give XXXX

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by Directly

First let me say I'm the expert on this photo--not you or anyone else---years ago a very qualified expert studied this photo and confirmed Comiskey, he has more knowledge in his finger tip than several experts on here put together--

Please share with us who this expert is.

[Directly]

Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure

Please share with us who this expert is.

Sorry really none of your business--I am going to respect their privacy--

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Directly

First let me say I'm the expert on this photo--not you or anyone else---years ago a very qualified expert studied this photo and confirmed Comiskey, he has more knowledge in his finger tip than several experts on here put together--so you were there is 1881 to see what Quinn or Comiskey looked like--no offense but you really don't know what your talking about --honestly after reading some of your opinion on another links where you really believe someone is someone without a ounce of documentation and doesn't even remotely look then --then you come on here and try to tell me something like he is too young or some other type of crap- --so you studied the my photo for what one hour, 3 days, one month, a year, five years --I have been studying and researching this photo for 30 years and only recently discovered its dated so PLEASE don't come on here an try to tell me anything--I have a note book full of research including correspondence with Comiskys descendance-- so best stick with the other thread and rant--thanks for your opinion because it doesn't really mean a hill of beans to me and no offense it never will-------you can go to the highest mountain top and tell everyone I said this, including Mr. King Expert--you know why --I really don't give XXXX

My bad. It sounds like you've got this one all sorted out already. Keep up the great work detective!

[Directly]

Originally Posted by Snowman

My bad. It sounds like you've got this one all sorted out already. Keep up the great work detective!

Thank you!

[slightlyrounded]

Originally Posted by chalupacollects

In my expert opinion “or not” this is a quite confusing thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After much research and squinting, I believe this meme might be historically significant