Fake Babe Ruth Press image on ebay?

[steve B]

The original is obviously not 1920.

The light hat and no pinstripes make it a Boston home uniform.
And it was taken in Fenway - Fenway Garage Co building in the background.

I don't know what years had what ads on the stands, so I can't put it in a particular year.

So oddly, the only thing they're even close to right about is that it might be an image from his Rookie year.

[michael3322]

Originally Posted by steve B

The original is obviously not 1920.

The light hat and no pinstripes make it a Boston home uniform.
And it was taken in Fenway - Fenway Garage Co building in the background.

I don't know what years had what ads on the stands, so I can't put it in a particular year.

So oddly, the only thing they're even close to right about is that it might be an image from his Rookie year.

Interesting. So the Library of Congress is using the wrong date? You might want to let them know.

[EddieP]

He’s listing another one as a Buy It Now for $15,000

https://www.ebay.com/itm/185451945075

[steve B]

Originally Posted by michael3322

Interesting. So the Library of Congress is using the wrong date? You might want to let them know.

It's probably a very low priority for them. And all I could do would be to narrow it down to a 6 year range, which probably isn't enough for them to make the change.

I've read some of their articles about preservation and the lengths they go to to try to preserve some things before they get too bad to handle. Like making a machine to deacidify books in bulk, which failed.

LOC is more organized than most archives. Most places that might have info about stuff I try to look up have listings like "Bike company X - various correspondence 1920-30 2500 items box 101.235" Same for pictures.

[drcy]

Another detail is it's advertised as an AP photo but has different company stampings on the back.

If someone wants to purchase a Goudey Ruth from a seller who calls it Topps, so be it. Personally, I prefer buyers who demonstrate a little more knowledge about what they sell. Though I think this particular seller was purposefully throwing everything including the kitchen sink into the description, perhaps to fish for keywords. The description also calls it Rookie and framed, of which it is neither.

[michael3322]

Originally Posted by drcy

Another detail is it's advertised as an AP photo but has different company stampings on the back.

If someone wants to purchase a Goudey Ruth from a seller who calls it Topps, so be it. Personally, I prefer buyers who demonstrate a little more knowledge about what they sell. Though I think this particular seller was purposefully throwing everything including the kitchen sink into the description, perhaps to fish for keywords. The description also calls it Rookie and framed, of which it is neither.

Couldn't agree more.

Not unrelated, check out this clearly fake Wagner T206 on eBay right now for a cool $100k with a full description that simply reads: "T206 Honus Wagner with a Tolstoi back."

[michael3322]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's probably a very low priority for them. And all I could do would be to narrow it down to a 6 year range, which probably isn't enough for them to make the change.

I've read some of their articles about preservation and the lengths they go to to try to preserve some things before they get too bad to handle. Like making a machine to deacidify books in bulk, which failed.

LOC is more organized than most archives. Most places that might have info about stuff I try to look up have listings like "Bike company X - various correspondence 1920-30 2500 items box 101.235" Same for pictures.

Good points. Thanks.