Honus Wagner Photo - Help please

[daves_resale_shop]

the uniform is 1912 (away)...

the other thing that is funny about it is that Nyser's (John C. Nyser) studio was in Hartford CT... Far from PA... In doing some research the studio was in business between 1908-1914 (at the very least)...

My concern is so much with the asking price as it is the authenticity of the piece... My gut tells me its a fantasy piece..

[jrlebert]

Well, my uncle has it in hand. What kind of questions should I be asking?

I was able to find the studio as well. I, too, was interested in how such a Pittsburgh-centric figure as Wagner would find his way to the studio.

[thecatspajamas]

Hmmmm...

http://www.huntauctions.com/online/i...224&lot_qual=a

http://www.sportsbuy.com/sellerListi...derId=12536069

[Jaybird]

The deckled edge is odd. Also, the mount being white is odd as well. Normally they are of some color. You should ask him if the photo is printed on the card stock or is it a separate photo that is glued onto the mount. Ask him the dimensions. Also is the photographers name embossed (stamped) into the cardboard or just printed on top.

I agree that this looks suspect.

[jrlebert]

Understood...

Here is his response:

The photo appears to be pasted onto the card.

There is a 3/16" gold border around the photo.

All lettering on the card printed in gold ink. "J. NYSER 2 Ford Street, Hartford, Conn"

Should I ask anything else?

[jrlebert]

And Jason... hi!

It's J.R., from Palms!

[jrlebert]

Also, per the description on eBay:

Card 4 1/4" X 6 1/2"
Photograph 3 7/8" X 5 1/2"

[thecatspajamas]

I would suggest not focusing on the studio mount (i.e. card) itself except to compare it to the one on the second link I posted and ask yourself why 2 different studios' mounts would have the same photo affixed. That in itself would make me very very suspicious. Original studio mounts from the period are relatively easy to find, and both the one your uncle has and the one in the second link I posted are likely genuine MOUNTS. The photograph affixed to them is another story. Having only relatively low-quality scans to view in both cases, I would hazard a guess that one, or more likely both, of the photographs themselves are not genuine.

Easiest thing to do first is to look at the photo under magnification and see if the image is composed of lots of little dots (printed image) or is an actual photograph. Beyond that, someone like Scott or David or Rhys who has dealt with more cabinet mounts than I have should be able to tell you what to look for.

I could certainly be wrong, but I don't have a good feeling about this one.

[jrlebert]

OK, totally understand so far.

Calling Scott, David, or Rhys!

Even though I have been on this site for over a year, it is mainly to absorb info and learn from the best, which is exactly why I took this discussion here. Not sure what their usernames are here, but if anyone could alert them and ask their opinion, I would appreciate it.

And Lance F, thank you!

[1880nonsports]

it is not a terrible marriage of what will turn out to be a copy photo and a random mount. Nothing about it looks right to me from a quick online and not in hand observation. In the late 1990's the market was flooded with many such reproduction images on old mounts. In the past year or two even better copies are making an appearance but on what often appears to not be vintage mounts. The stamp on the back is ridiculous on an image if real produced after the tax act expired and the mount with gold trim and scalloped edges as well doesn't fit. Lance, David, and others here know quite a bit more than I do however I've studied and handled quite a few mounted photographs from all eras. Such supposition that it's not original is bolstered by Lance's link to the Hunt photo which I saw after my immediate reaction. Taking a loupe to it as suggested earlier would be the place to start. It's hard to tell from the eBay scan enough visual information as it appears it was scanned in black/white/greyscale so hard to qualify any depth/contrast in the photo and it's relation to the mount. Just to point out in case my wife hasn't written you - I'm rarely right - if ever

[drcy]

I'm late to the thread as I'm on vacation, but it appears to be a fake. The mount, which may very well be genuine, is like an 1880s-90s mount. I'm assuming from comments that the Wagner image is from later.

[Runscott]

Yucchhh