Honus Wagner Photo - Help please

[thecatspajamas]

Dave, I didn't mean to imply that the images for the cabinets came from Hunt's auction, as the resolution on the image Hunt posted online would not be good enough to produce a print that would fool anyone. There was probably a high-res, wider-cropped scan of another posted online at some time or printed elsewhere that simply hasn't turned up in my search. Just throwing out any that I find to show that it is not a unique image of Wagner, though it certainly isn't one of the more-well-known shots of him.


One more, from a 1917 birthday program Mastro auctioned in 2008:

http://www.legendaryauctions.com/Lot...ntoryid=89905#

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Dave, I didn't mean to imply that the images for the cabinets came from Hunt's auction, as the resolution on the image Hunt posted online would not be good enough to produce a print that would fool anyone. There was probably a high-res, wider-cropped scan of another posted online at some time or printed elsewhere that simply hasn't turned up in my search. Just throwing out any that I find to show that it is not a unique image of Wagner, though it certainly isn't one of the more-well-known shots of him.


One more, from a 1917 birthday program Mastro auctioned in 2008:

http://www.legendaryauctions.com/Lot...ntoryid=89905#

Oh, I know Lance. I was just thinking out loud. It just seems like so many of these type pieces are just copied directly from the most recent auction of that particular item.

I'm not comfortable with it myself. Just wondering where exactly they might have copied the scan from given the cropping shown.

[1880nonsports]

1910's photo. Can happen but unlikely. Also, pirated images - especially after 1900 generally WOULDN'T have the photographers attribution to tie them to it...........

no guarantees whether written or implied

[1880nonsports]

the tax act was in place from 1864 to 1866. A 5 cent stamp would mean the item was sold/selling for between .50 and 1.00. I just put the stamp in my photo program and will try and get a large image to see if I can make out a cancellation however I'm sure what I'm seeing in sooo many ways is the rear end of a duck..........

I haven't fooled much with photographs in the past 10-15 years. I just looked at the stamp closely hoping to find a date until I realized a "cancel" in those days on a photograph wouldn't be "date stamp" cancelled like that on a pack of smokes. Somewhat a moot point since 1864-1866 might be a bit early for an item not produced until 1910's. So you have an attributed mounted image containing an 1860's stamp, scalloped edges and gold trim mount produced and used in the late 1880's/early 1890's, and a 1910's photo. Yesh - an hour of my life I'll never get back :-)

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Dave, I didn't mean to imply that the images for the cabinets came from Hunt's auction, as the resolution on the image Hunt posted online would not be good enough to produce a print that would fool anyone. There was probably a high-res, wider-cropped scan of another posted online at some time or printed elsewhere that simply hasn't turned up in my search.

The image this was created from did not need to be wider-cropped - I suspect that the reason this particular image has been so popular with the forger(s) is that, due to the nature of the margins, they can easily be 'widened' using copy/paste.

But the subject of this thread is a real laugher - black and white with an image of a stamp that was attached to black paper, then cut/pasted to a white mount?

[Jaybird]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The image this was created from did not need to be wider-cropped - I suspect that the reason this particular image has been so popular with the forger(s) is that, due to the nature of the margins, they can easily be 'widened' using copy/paste.

But the subject of this thread is a real laugher - black and white with an image of a stamp that was attached to black paper, then cut/pasted to a white mount?

Based on some of JR's earlier responses, I think the scan was done in B&W but that the mount at least is not White. He mentions gold lettering, etc. So I think the scan was done in B&W instead of color which is also not helping. But all this to say that it doesn't look real to anyone and this appears to be a widely faked image.

[steve B]

The stamp was issued in either 1894 if it's brown, or 1897 if it's blue.

It's also a postage stamp, rather than a tax stamp. It's not unheard of for one to be used improperly in place of a tax stamp, but not decades after the tax that required it was ended.

From the look of it it's got either some black album page or remnants of a mount behind it.

As a stamp it's worth between 1 and 5 dollars if it's used. and probably about the same if it's not used but stuck to something.

Overall I'm not liking the combination, although there being more photo than the readily available online scans is interesting.

There was a bat company in Hartford in the early 1900's. Bon-Topper bat company. I believe they made pro bats. I have a Fred Parent bat they made. That is probably a game bat.

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Jaybird

Based on some of JR's earlier responses, I think the scan was done in B&W but that the mount at least is not White. He mentions gold lettering, etc. So I think the scan was done in B&W instead of color which is also not helping. But all this to say that it doesn't look real to anyone and this appears to be a widely faked image.

Yes, the fact that 'the uncle' provided a b&w scan is what I was talking about.

[jrlebert]

Guys, thanks so much for all the info. Aside from the one snarky comment by runscott (surprise), I learned more about this photo and fantasy pieces like this in a few days than my uncle or I was able to research together. That's exactly why I took it to this board. I really appreciate it.

I will be calling my uncle after work tonight, and recommending he take the listing down, in (the most likely) case that it is a fantasy piece.

I'm going to see if he can send it to me so I can get a higher res scan up, and take a loupe to it to check out the photo.

Again, thanks all!

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by jrlebert

Guys, thanks so much for all the info. Aside from the one snarky comment by runscott (surprise), I learned more about this photo and fantasy pieces like this in a few days than my uncle or I was able to research together. That's exactly why I took it to this board. I really appreciate it.

I will be calling my uncle after work tonight, and recommending he take the listing down, in (the most likely) case that it is a fantasy piece.

I'm going to see if he can send it to me so I can get a higher res scan up, and take a loupe to it to check out the photo.

Again, thanks all!

Maybe you didn't learn much from my comment, but some of the other forum members probably did. And while you are trying to gain information, I suspect it's of a different type than what you claim.

And as I pointed out (and you apparently missed), it's not about scan resolution, it's about all the other stuff surrounding this forgery, including the story.

Regarding your "snarky (surprise)" comment, provide us with a clear color scan of a genuine photo of Honus Wagner, and if it's a cool item, I will be one of the first to say so. But if it's forged crap, I will also be one of the first to say so. Forged photos are bad for this hobby, period. Your item description and scan told me right away that you had not done your research and were trying to sell a forgery, knowingly or not. If you know nothing about the item you are trying to sell, why claim that it's an unknown previously unpublished photo? In case you forgot, from your auction: "You will not find another copy anywhere" and the title: "Original photograph Honus Wagner *** NEVER SEEN BEFORE *** unpublished"

This item has ZERO bids, which means you can go update it to add some of the information you've learned here. I'll hold my breath.

[jrlebert]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Maybe you didn't learn much from my comment, but some of the other forum members probably did. And while you are trying to gain information, I suspect it's of a different type than what you claim.

And as I pointed out (and you apparently missed), it's not about scan resolution, it's about all the other stuff surrounding this forgery, including the story.

Regarding your "snarky (surprise)" comment, provide us with a clear color scan of a genuine photo of Honus Wagner, and if it's a cool item, I will be one of the first to say so. But if it's forged crap, I will also be one of the first to say so. Forged photos are bad for this hobby, period. Your item description and scan told me right away that you had not done your research and were trying to sell a forgery, knowingly or not. If you know nothing about the item you are trying to sell, why claim that it's an unknown previously unpublished photo? In case you forgot, from your auction: "You will not find another copy anywhere" and the title: "Original photograph Honus Wagner *** NEVER SEEN BEFORE *** unpublished"

This item has ZERO bids, which means you can go update it to add some of the information you've learned here. I'll hold my breath.

OK, Scott. First of all, come off your high horse. As I have stated many times, this is not MY auction, it is my uncle's. And you are absolutely right, we did not do nearly as expansive of research as would be available HERE, which is, again, as I stated several times, EXACTLY why I brought this discussion here.

Here is the whole story, for the skeptic Scott and others. My uncle antiques regularly throughout the Hudson Valley in NY. He was at a flea market, saw a bag of old photos, and paid $5 for a bag of photos, in which this Wagner was. He did a bit of research online, but couldn't find much on the photo.

This was when he contacted me, in L.A. He sent me a link to his auction, and my research began. This was 5 days ago. I was able to find a little info about the studio, J. Nyser, but, like many of you, was immediately skeptical that such a Pittsburgh-centric figure, who was born near Pittsburgh, played in Pittsburgh, died near Pittsburgh, and was, if I remember correctly, sheriff of Allegheny County at one point, would have been doing in a Connecticut studio.

His scanner is only a B/W scanner, so unfortunately, that's the best scan we've got, as of right now. I am going to ask him to send it to me, so that I can get a higher res scan up, as I stated before.

I don't understand this sentence from you, Scott: "And while you are trying to gain information, I suspect it's of a different type than what you claim." I am an extremely reputable member of this hobby, as many on THIS board can attest to, and have no desire to represent this in any other way than as what it is, WHICH IS WHY I CAME TO NET54 FOR MORE INFO.

If it is forged crap, then by all means, tell me its forged crap, and just give me the reasons why, which this thread has certainly provided. I am not arguing with a single finding, and, in fact, am continually amazed at what this board is able to come up with in just a few days. Again, it's why I came here.

I would not recommend to my uncle that we update the auction at all. My only recommendation would be to take it town altogether, so as to not sell what could, and most likely is, a forgery or, as some call, a "fantasy piece".

I hope that clears things up for you, Scott. Thanks.