Revisiting the D302 Jackie Robinson Bond Bread Release Date (Photo Related)

[CharleyBrown]

Bond Bread Backs for Reference Purposes:

Back 1:



Back 2:



Back 3:

[r2678]

Just a minor point, but I don't believe the photo of Jackie sliding is the same one used for the card. Most obvious difference is the photo shows the white of Jackie's sanitary sock and the position of the ball cap. The two appear to be in sequence with the photo a fraction earlier than the photo used for the card.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by r2678

Just a minor point, but I don't believe the photo of Jackie sliding is the same one used for the card. Most obvious difference is the photo shows the white of Jackie's sanitary sock and the position of the ball cap. The two appear to be in sequence with the photo a fraction earlier than the photo used for the card.

I agree, and would also add that rather than Jackie's head being copy/pasted, it looks like his facial features were "enhanced" by an editor's pen for improved contrast in the final printed product. I have seen this many times with news photos used for publication where the lighting was such that facial features were either obscured in shadow or blanched out in the photograph, so the editor "pencils them in" (or pens, or paints, as the case may be) so that they show up better when printed. It usually results in the subject having a rather cartoonish looking face (as seen here), but I suppose they felt that was preferable to a face with indistinguishable features. It looks like Jackie's face was badly obscured in shadow in the original above, so it is reasonable to assume that the subsequent shot, taken from about the same angle (just with Jackie's right arm sagging slightly) would have the same problematic shadowing of his face. It seems to me that this is a case where even taking multiple shots, to assure you got at least one good negative to work with, was not enough.

Very impressive research though, and both of you should be commended for taking the already-tough task of tracking down original photos for a card issue to the next level of actually using it for further research. Well done, and good luck with tracking down the remaining photos!

[71buc]

John and Lance I see the minute differences between the photo I found and the image on the card. They obviously were taken fractions of a second apart. We are hoping that by posting this fresh eyes, such as yours, will turn up further clues and information regarding this set. Below is a link to the image Corbis has. It appears to be closer to the image on the sliding card. It's date and description is essentially the same as my photo. Although my photo is not the exact image its discovery has led us to challenge thirty plus years of preconceived knowledge related to a very significant set of cards. We can no longer state that beyond a reason of a doubt that any of the D302 cards are Jackie Robinson Rookie cards issued in 1947.

http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-ph...iDwp-SmM.email

I believe that as the number of photos released into the public grows, we will discover that some of the hobby's information pertaining to undated regional sets may be based on speculation rather than fact. Shaun is a very talented and passionate investigator. I am lucky that he was so willing to ply those talents to this research. Although I love collecting original photos for their artistic appeal, searching for images used to make cards is challenging and in this case a bit exciting. I'm certain Shaun would agree it has the feel of being a baseball card archeologist

Mike

[CharleyBrown]

Mike, it has been a pleasure, and I look forward to gathering more information and establishing definitive dates. It definitely does feel like being a baseball card archaeologist!

Shaun