![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
While we all are waiting for the results, feel free to bid on the cool old judge items we have in the January 1st sale including an 1888 Grays Studio Charlie Ferguson, Old Judge N-172's and 1889 Bean Eater photo.
Again Happy Holidays Troy |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thanks for posting, Troy. I sent an email regarding the Jan 1 auction and didn't receive any response.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
edited after speaking with Troy
![]() Thanks for the discussion!
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ Last edited by Runscott; 12-24-2012 at 11:50 AM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
While I recognize I am comparing only scans, the scans posted by the auction house do not differ in any significant way from the initial scan of the image. They exhibit a degradation in resolution (in ways having nothing to do with contrast) compared to the LOC copy that make me struggle to understand how they can be printed from the same negative. I have never before seen such differences in identical albumen photos where each are genuine. While I'm interested to hear what Mr. Messier has to say, unless he can establish that one cannot in the 21st century create an albumen photo that is chemically indistinguishable from one printed in the 19th century, I would regard his results as inconclusive.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There are going to be distinct differences in this Cdv and the loc one because this one is a vignette process albumen whereas the loc version is a full view non vignette version of the same pose. If you look at the photographers branding label on the rear of our Cdv it says vignette specialty.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The vignette process has clearly been mistaken for photo degradation. Vignette was used to make the center pieces of the pose, In this case the team, stand out, rather than the back ground. It was a very common practice in the mid 19th century especially by this photographer. Mr. Messier will be the deciding factor on this because as a scientific expert on 19th century photography there is no way to rule his results(good or bad) as inconclusive. His findings either combined with sgc or aside from sgc will be the final verdict on this card.
Troy |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Corey- The 1875 Hartfords CdV comes with both the actual background visible or obscured. Could this CdV have been produced in a similar manner? Also, some images from the same photo shoot are slightly different such as the those of the 1874 Red Stockings. The placement of the equipment is different in the few copies known suggesting multiple negatives. Could the Atlantics CdV be from a different negative from the same shoot? I realize there appear to be no differences between the LOC copy and the CdV, but isn't it possible they may actually be from different negatives?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Troy,
The differences in resolution pertain to the players themselves. Perhaps the vignette process caused this. If so. then I will have learned something. In addition, I will point out that the printing in the verso (where the vignette process is identified) has been mentioned as the aspect of this CdV that caused Lelands to reject it. Accordingly I would hope that as part of Mr Messier's analysis he examine the verso. Finally I must respectfully disagree with your view as to the capabilities of forensic testing. It is a negative process which tells one what something is not, as opposed to what something is. If an item flunks forensic testing, then we know it is a fake. It it passes then we can say it is consistent with authentic items but that doesn't mean it MUST be authentic. It raises then the feasibility of whether a forger could recreate the process in current times. In saying all this I am not saying the CdV has to be a fake. Rather I am simply noting aspects of it that trouble me in the hope they will be directly addressed by Mr. Messier. I should also reiterate that while we may disagree about certain aspects about this item, I do appreciate your openness about this item and responsiveness to expressed concerns. Last edited by benjulmag; 12-25-2012 at 08:41 AM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Troy,
Great looking piece. I hope for your sake, and the sake of the hobby, everything turns out to be authentic when the expert reviews it in a few weeks. You are doing the right thing. Happy Holidays, Tony |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I just went through the email and there is no email from you. Our email is info@sacoriverauction.com or you can call me 207-650-5677 that is my cell phone and i can answer any questions you have.
Troy |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Also you talk about taking a sample would damage it. I just compered the photos from ebay to in the holder and there's more damage to the upper left corner now then there use to be.
Last edited by yanks12025; 01-16-2013 at 01:46 PM. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ Last edited by Runscott; 01-16-2013 at 04:51 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
T206 SGC Graded Brooklyn Team Set 23 out of 27 Cards SOLD SOLD!!! | brookdodger55 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 3 | 03-31-2012 05:15 PM |
Looking for Brooklyn Dodger Collectors | dougscats | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 0 | 12-27-2010 04:19 PM |
Looking for Brooklyn Dodgers collectors | dougscats | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 11-24-2010 11:16 AM |
FS: RARE Ca. 1860's CDV Civil War Generals and Officers featuring Abner Doubleday SGC Auth | Archive | 19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T | 0 | 09-06-2008 06:07 PM |
Early Baseball CDV | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 07-25-2004 10:24 PM |