 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
07-02-2009, 09:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
great - thank you Jimmy...
you sound like the perfect one to ask, then...are these items that they are talking about in the ad, and that you saw in person...are they different from the usual Burke photos that we normally see (as David described above with the stamp on the back, etc)??
Thanks for chiming in and helping me on this and thanks to everyone else in the above posts too...
__________________
www.thetriple-l.com 
|
|
#2
07-02-2009, 11:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hello Jason.
The only difference from these photos and the regular Burkes that I could see was the typed name of the ballplayer. However, the overall condition wasn't the best. Lots of discoloration as you can clearly see in the Foxx photo in the ad of Old Cardboard #12. I got the feeling that where ever the photos were stored for seventy years wasn't the most ideal conditions. Hope this helped. Best regards, Jimmy
|
|
#3
07-03-2009, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wouldn't call them proofs. But Huggins & Scott had some cards with corresponding Burke photos and I thought they were great. The lots struck me as neat ways to collect.
The silvering on the Dimaggio is common to Pre War old photos, though oridnarilly not that heavy. A big positive is it is proof the photo is old, as silvering only appears after numerous decades. If you find a 1910 Ty Cobb or a rookie era Joe Dimaggio and it has silvering, you can be near certain it is vintage. I compare it to an UDA hologram but certifying old age. Last edited by drc; 07-03-2009 at 12:35 PM.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
