Showing off a custom cut signature booklet - Steinbrenner

[Cfern023]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Is that so?

Tell me... In what respect does the signed Polaroid snapshot of Steinbrenner--preserving a chance meeting with a fan--differ from this snapshot of Ruth?



Or this blurry snapshot of Gehrig and Ruth? (It's so blurry--if it were mine I'd cut off the signatures and have a card made.)

Lets see, in the time Ruth played I'm sure getting your picture taken was sometimes a big deal. These days, you get your picture taken every day and don't even know it.

The ruths are great pieces, in great settings in great era appropriate clothing. The Steinbrenner poloroid strikes me as instant TMZ.

Feel how you may, but you can't deny how much crap is produced since the 1960's, this polaroid included.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Cfern023

Lets see, in the time Ruth played I'm sure getting your picture taken was sometimes a big deal.

You're only off by about a century. In the 1840s, getting your picture taken was a big deal. In the 1930s, Kodak was selling millions of cameras a year.

People collect snapshots because they are unique, and nothing at all like the mass-produced "collectibles" you keep comparing them to.

[Jlighter]

Holy crap your comparing Babe Ruth to the Boss, there not synonymous.

[David Atkatz]

No, they're not.

[packs]

With such a delicate worldview it must be hard to throw anything away. Each creation being so unique and a part of historical record.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by packs

With such a delicate worldview it must be hard to throw anything away. Each creation being so unique and a part of historical record.

Nah. I'd throw that manufactured card away in a heartbeat.

[yanks12025]

I think the card looks nice, bit I agree with David to a point. I think it would have been better to use a index card instead of this photo. Yes it's just a polariod but it is unique and I'm sure there's not many out there.

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

No, they're not.

You sure showed me.

[David Atkatz]

Any time, Jake.

You're welcome.

[steve B]

Just a minor point. Polaroids aren't necessarily unique. Polaroid made a device for copying them.

I'm sort of with David on this one, I generally don't like seeing anything cut up. On the other hand, without the background story to give the polaroid some context it becomes what everyone else calls it. A rather poor photo with a signature.

I know I wouldn't have cut it, but I can see why someone would.

And as others have said aesthetically a 3x5 would have ended up much nicer. And the polaroid probably could have easily been swapped for a 3x5.

Steve B