Tintype of Game Action

[SteveS]

Gary, yeah, seeing a famous team or player from back then "in action" would be amazing. Do you have any idea from when my tintype might have come? I'm thinking from the uniform style and lack of a catcher's mask/mitt probably late-1860s-to-mid-1870s.

Molenick, I don't know which bat NiceDocter thought looked big, but it looks to me as though the boy in your photo is definitely holding a bat.

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by SteveS

Gary, yeah, seeing a famous team or player from back then "in action" would be amazing. Do you have any idea from when my tintype might have come? I'm thinking from the uniform style and lack of a catcher's mask/mitt probably late-1860s-to-mid-1870s.

Molenick, I don't know which bat NiceDocter thought looked big, but it looks to me as though the boy in your photo is definitely holding a bat.

My first impression would be 1875-1880.

[SteveS]

Thanks, Gary. It's amazing how fundamentally similar the game is to what it was 150 years ago.

[Leon]

Not in action, the guy batting is posed, but tintypes nonetheless...

[molenick]

Very nice tintypes, Leon.

[darkhorse9]

Maybe I'm ignorant on such matters, but I don't see how the conclusion is made that the OP tintypes are from baseball at all.

I see a guy holding a stick and another crouched down. That could be any number of things. The other looks like a family photo.

What exactly am I missing?

[molenick]

The things that point to it being baseball are:

• The person in the background is crouching in a position and at a distance a catcher would have been doing in this time period

• The stick the person in the foreground is holding appears to have been "worked" rather than naturally occurring (it looks to be smooth, slightly tapered, and rounded)

• The clothes the person in the foreground is wearing (the striped pants, high socks, and white shirt with a kerchief/tie) are in line with a baseball player of this time

• The brick placed in the position it is in strikes me as an impromptu "home plate" used for the pose -- which is why I don't think this is an "action" shot but adds to why I do think it is a posed shot of a batter and catcher

The OP said the second photo "appears to be the same player with a group of people" so it is only a "baseball" tintype if you accept that this is a baseball uniform and that a baseball tintype is one that has any baseball content at all.

I suppose something else could be happening but I wouldn't speculate on what else that could be.