Babe Ruth Red Sox Photo

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Mine is definitely older, the big question is; Is it old enough to be a type 3? I know a knowledgeable photo guy who can hopefully answer that question. It is MUCH heavier stock than modern photo paper, though not cardboard like a cabinet. Either way it's very cool. Also wild that it's a doctored photo of an outdoor shot. I thought it was taken in a studio!

[oldeboo]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Also wild that it's a doctored photo of an outdoor shot. I thought it was taken in a studio!

Which to me raises the question of why? For what purpose? The effort is beyond what is typically seen with hand marked and cropped newsprint photos. Interestingly, neither example in this thread has significant markings on the reverse to suggest specific usage. There does not seem to be a large quantity of these to show a wide distribution of any sort.

The example in question appears to have a few minor condition issues such as a marking near the face, light indentations, the tape on the reverse, and a darker tone. It very well could be period or Type III as some would call it. Without any markings or knowing the intent of the heavy editing, tough call. If there was a period negative produced, was it used for something during the time, then later found to create a photo circa 1980s as suggested in the posted sale? Perhaps someone will recognize the edited image from a period item. Nothing would surprise me, there is some mystery with this one still.

It's a nice photo either way. I suppose it's a second generation photo that either looks old or it doesn't. It looks old. Old enough for that elusive and specific 2 year threshold, not sure. Not that you were asking for my opinion.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

I was asking for ALL opinions. Now which ones I listen to is a whole other kettle of fish I appreciate your contribution!

[D. Bergin]

What's the size? Is it 5x7 like the Christies, or an 8x10?

[D. Bergin]

Double weight photo paper?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Double weight photo paper?

It is 5 x 7 and double weight seems about right.

Scott

EDIT: Just heard back from a well regarded (and well-known on this board) photo expert who thinks it is Pre WWII which would make it the oldest copy of this image he has seen. I am actually overnighting it to him to see if he can pin it down any more in hand. He also raised an interesting point. If the negative was altered years later this could be within the 2 year window on that particular new negative while still being significantly newer than 1919.

[oldeboo]

This was the one posted previously that sold for $1,375 (5x7)
https://www.christies.com/lot/lot-6296499

This one sold for $64 (8x10)
https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c...50024-80295.s#

Both claimed to be circa 1980s Type IV by PSA

This sold for $3,326 (RPPC)
https://www.valuablepostcards.com/20...pril-2021.html

...interesting

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

It is 5 x 7 and double weight seems about right.

Scott

EDIT: Just heard back from a well regarded (and well-known on this board) photo expert who thinks it is Pre WWII which would make it the oldest copy of this image he has seen. I am actually overnighting it to him to see if he can pin it down any more in hand. He also raised an interesting point. If the negative was altered years later this could be within the 2 year window on that particular new negative while still being significantly newer than 1919.

Love the Phot, but DON'T let RY put a pin anywhere near it!