Honus and his buddies...

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by bobbvc

Mark, people who throw out the words "self delusion" like candy should occasionally take a look in the mirror. I wasn't making this personal "at all". Whether the photo turns out to be Clarke or someone else they call "Cap"........Where you are being "self delusional" is assuming someone you don't know has an "agenda"

Bob - I didn't say you were making anything personal. To the contrary I wanted to be sure that my comments about you weren't taken as personally derogatory, though perhaps that goal is not possible to achieve. To understand that you might carefully read the 1st 2 pages of from the SABR link I posted (note that I am the author of the article).

You don't need to have an "agenda" for "self-delusion" to be at play in a case like this - in the portion of the article I am referencing, no one had an agenda. As explained, being smart and experienced does not inoculate one from making ludicrous face claims, especially if one is not knowledgeable with respect to facial comparison - this is a real subject with a pretty good body of literature.

I should add that we don't know whether the person who inscribed the back of your photo was calling someone "Cap" - it could be a reference to a location. There are at least 2 "Cap Rivers" that I could find, and it seems like it could be a common local name for many locations. Even if "Cap" refers to a person, it can't be Clarke because of gross facial structural differences - it's not even close.

As far as self-delusion on my part, please explain. And, what is my agenda? There is a big world of misidentifed baseball photos - I don't need to pick on you. (and BTW - please post (or email to me) a hi-res of that face so I can present a better analysis).

[bobbvc]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

As far as self-delusion on my part, please explain. And, what is my agenda? There is a big world of misidentifed baseball photos - I don't need to pick on you. (and BTW - please post (or email to me) a hi-res of that face so I can present a better analysis).

Mark, the "delusion" I was referring to was your quote "big desire for it to be true" as referencing me. I had no such "desire". But, to be fair, I "assumed" you were implying I was looking for something to be gained so we'll call that a push. I never mentioned you had an agenda, I was saying I didn't have one. Let's move forward please.

10-20 pounds of off season weight gain and relaxation may not change skeletal structure, but it can make people look different, especially when using 2 barely decipherable 100+ year old photos.

Hoping more evidence turns up in the future for this one.

If you really want to give me a "teachable moment", any tips on scanning would be appreciated, but for now- try these if they help.

(Last thing, just for the record. If I was hoping for it to be someone, it wouldn't be Clarke. It would be Doheny, Veil or some other seldom photoed Pirate.)

[bmarlowe1]

The presence of Miller indicates that this photo is probably somewhat late for Doheny or Veil.

I can't be sure if your photo in hand is more clear than what you just posted, but when you post a photo on this site its resolution is automatically reduced.

So it would be better if you emailed the image to me. Scan it at 600 dpi if you can, save it as an uncompressed tif (or tiff) file if you can. Crop out the face that will hopefully reduce the file size so that it can be emailed.

Also - the OP's photo seems to be clearer than yours, it would be nice if he could do the same. My email address is:

bmarlowe@comcast.net

I'll try to do something useful (beyond mere words) with it later tonight.