Circa 1846 Daguerreotype – Alexander Joy Cartwright debate

[oldjudge]

Before this thread slips into the depths of Network54, I was just wondering if anyone on the board, other than Corey, really believes that Alexander Cartwright is in that six player dag.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Some think it is, some think it isn't, some hope it is, but no one knows that it is.

[oldjudge]

David-That's not what I asked. I know some people are unsure and some think it is not Cartwright. I'd just like to know who thinks it is him.

[mark evans]

I sure don't know. But, the retouched photo at the bottom of page 7 of the report is curious, as it looks to me to picture a sort of hybrid between photos C and A1, sharing characteristics of both. If the retouched photo is Cartwright, that lends support in my mind that photo C could be Cartwright as well.

[GaryPassamonte]

Jay,
Since serious questions have been raised about the image, I don't believe anyone could be 100% sure Cartwright is pictured. On the other hand, I can't be 100% sure it isn't him, given the provenance. As others have said, we will probably never know for sure. But one thing is certain. Once doubts become associated with a piece, it is never held in the esteem it was formerly. I applaud Mark for his earnest efforts and I applaud Corey for his willingness to take the risk of having a piece in his personal collection deemed to be misidentified and thus, much less valuable.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Jay,
Since serious questions have been raised about the image, I don't believe anyone could be 100% sure Cartwright is pictured. On the other hand, I can't be 100% sure it isn't him, given the provenance. As others have said, we will probably never know for sure. But one thing is certain. Once doubts become associated with a piece, it is never held in the esteem it was formerly. I applaud Mark for his earnest efforts and I applaud Corey for his willingness to take the risk of having a piece in his personal collection deemed to be misidentified and thus, much less valuable.

That's not actually true. At least one person is 100% sure that it isn't Cartwright, as evidenced by the article. I'm positive that there are others who agree with him. I also disagree that the piece has lost esteem due to the new discussions - it's still the photograph chosen by Cartwright's grandson to be used by the HOF, and it's a 150+ yr-old dag that came from the Cartwright estate.

Please keep in mind that there are many of us who saw this photograph many years ago, along with some of the other Cartwright examples. This is not a new discussion - just a much more detailed analysis. I very much enjoyed the paper and the discussions.

[oldjudge]

Scott-You are exactly right. As I have indicated previously, I do not believe that it is AC. I'm sure many others feel either that way or are unsure. However, I am still looking for someone, anyone, other than Corey, who is convinced that it is AC.
As to value, that is not the discussion here. The number is immaterial since Corey wouldn't sell it. Ultimately, if it ever comes to market, the market will determine its worth.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by mark evans

I sure don't know. But, the retouched photo at the bottom of page 7 of the report is curious, as it looks to me to picture a sort of hybrid between photos C and A1, sharing characteristics of both. If the retouched photo is Cartwright, that lends support in my mind that photo C could be Cartwright as well.

Mark - thanks for taking the time to read the newsletter and post. I would respond:
1) The image you refer to was not used in the analysis by either expert because it was heavily altered and over-painted by an artist.
2) From p. 31 - The only specific similarities between the A's and C pointed out by [Corey's expert,] Mr. Richards, are similar vertical alignment and approximate iris size. Both are commonly shared by different people, and the latter claim requires a liberal interpretation of "approximate."

[ChiefBenderForever]

Very facinating stuff, I think it is him based on a gut instinct with no merit or qualifications to say so but that's what I think.

[GaryPassamonte]

It seems there are those who feel 100% for and against. I stand corrected. Nonetheless, I'm certain the vast majority are somewhere in the realm of unsure.
As to esteem and value, though not part of the original point at hand. You would be hard pressed to find a card or piece of baseball memorabilia not damaged by doubts cast upon it, with the possible exception of the "Gretzky" Wagner to some degree.