Honus Wagner Cabinet Card 1911

[Runscott]

This is almost certainly a case of a current collector wanting a Pinkerton-style cabinet of Wagner, and simply gluing a trimmed Bain photo to the nicest dark grey mount he could find.

Basically, if you plan on keeping it and you like it, then it doesn't matter. Otherwise, you are going to have a tough time convincing anyone that back in 1909 a photographer in a studio in Canada picked up a photo from Bain, trimmed Bain's name from the bottom of it, and then glued it to his own mount, with his own studio's name printed on the mount. While some here may think that was commonly done, it wasn't.

[Leon]

Personally, I consider it a homemade cabinet card and would value it accordingly. Nice pose though...

[drc]

My opinion is putting an original old photo on a modern (or in this case, different) mount isn't inherently or always a a bad thing. I've seen valuable antique photos mounted on clearly modern mounts as part of restoration, and Culver photos are often pasted to modern manilla cards-- I don't think the Culver cards devalue the photos on the market. It's the trimming that would be the problem for me. I'm not saying I'd like a Conlon photo to be pasted to a different period mount, as I wouldn't, but that isn't a huge issue for me.

But an original Conlon photo of Wagner would still have value, even if trimmed and remounted.

I take the 'acceptability' and 'value' of remounting on a case by case basis. I won't give a blanket rule. And I believe there are cases where attractively mounting an old photo will not lower the value at all. Though I think it's best done if the mount is clearly modern.

[joeadcock]

Hey guys

Love the honesty here.

A bit demoralizing about the "homemade" cabinet business, but again, what the heck. I like the thing.

And no matter what the opinons here, I know they are opinions as we will not know the real truth about this cabinet(or whatever it is).

Like so much that occured 100 years ago or so, not enough of a paper trail or info to really know the absolute history of a card(or cabinet or whatever).

[packs]

Personally I realy like the piece and think it presents very well.

[drc]

I haven't given a real opinion on it. In part, because I haven't thought about it too hard. I think there's a good chance homemade, however famous images were traded and borrowed by professionals in the old days so I won't say for certain.

I don't think putting a vintage Conlon on a period mount ruins the value, in particular if it was done many years ago. For these types of situations, I'd want to know what you paid before I make an assessment.

The only other question is if the print is original/vintage.

Clearly what you should do is send me $100 so I can write a letter that sends inconclusive. For $75 it can be upgraded to a full letter of inconclusivity, which will include picture and hologram. No, wait, just the picture, I'm out of holograms.

[terjung]

I'm still curious to know how the AH came to use "Type 1" when describing the piece. Any liability there?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by drc

I think there's a good chance homemade, however famous images were traded and borrowed by professionals in the old days so I won't say for certain.

We see them all the time - they are on plain mounts without a studio name. I have several.