Are these Conlon photos?

[drc]

Unless they're forged, those are Conlon's signatures on the back.

[horzverti]

Great topic.
Let's take a look.
Conlon marked his work 'Conlon' and 'Conlon Photo'. Sometimes, but not always circled...we know this.
Conlon most often, but not always, signed in bottom right corner of verso.
It is very odd to see a Conlon sig accompanied by a different copyright stamp.
Take a look at the first 'o' in the name Conlon on both signatures. The 'o' is not even slightly enclosed in the capital 'C'. Charles almost always bunched the first 'o' inside the capital 'C'. It sometimes is so pronounced that looks as if Conlon circled the first 'o' with the 'C'.
Regarding the early 20s White Sox unis; tough to accurately tell, but the do seem like the home whites and not the traveling greys. Conlon took the great majority of his photos on the east coast more specifically in New York. If the Sox were in NY to play the Yankees, they would be in their grey uniforms.
At first glance the sigs look ok, but they just seem to be a little off.
In the second picture the word 'Photo' actually looks more true to Conlon's hand than the last name.
Another thing I noticed is the location of the sigs in relation to the other writing. They seem to be too conveniently placed in open spots between the written areas.
One thing that you can be sure of is that they originally came from the John Rogers Archive (hologram). The Rogers archive is the source of almost all of the Conlon items in our hobby. My opinion: These were purchased through one of Rogers' sales outlets on eBay without the Conlon sigs, the sigs were added and then they were resold with the sigs.
The sigs just seem a little off.
Just curious, who did you get these from?

[sphere and ash]

I do not believe these are Conlon images. Conlon did travel outside of New York to photograph baseball, including trips to Philadelphia in 1905 and 1910 for the World Series, Washington in 1912 for Opening Day and spring training in 1914. There seems little reason, however, for him to visit Chicago at the time these photographs were taken. Furthermore, in my opinion, the composition of these photographs is not consistent with Conlon's aesthetic.

The Rogers Archive is quite large, but it is certainly not the only, or even the largest, source of Conlon images; Christie's Baseball Magazine archive sale in 1996 was a major source and that added to an already large supply.

[repsher]

They were purchase from "soxphotos" on ebay. They could very well be forged, but the interesting thing is they weren't described as being Conlon photos and there wasn't a premium paid as if they were Conlon photos. So if someone forged them, they did a good job copying is sig, but no one even tried to benefit from it.