Carl Horner Photographs

[Archive]

Posted By: t-206collector

Anyone know where one can locate/purchase copies/reproductions of Carl Horner's photographs that were used as the foundation for many turn of the century baseball cards? Does the Library of Congress (or similar library) website have any? I would like to display a couple with my collection.

Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Please repost in the B/S/T thread

Elliot

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

If you check this page on my web-site, you'll find a book that is loaded with Carl Horner photos. When I went to find the link, I noticed I had said they were by "Conlon", which is incorrect.

Spalding's 1905 "How to Run Bases" has 34 Horner portraits, many of which were used in early candy and tobacco cards: http://www.homestead.com/runscott/Pubs20th.html

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

If you are looking just for images to print out and display with your cards, the LOC would be about as good as any place-- though I don't know if they actually have any Horners.

The original Horner cabinet cards (with his name on the mount) are very rare.

Those large (8x10") 'Horner Cabinets' with T206 pses are also rare, but relatively findable and not too expensive. You will see these on eBay once in a while. They actually are not photos but prints pasted to a dark colored mount-- but look pretty cool (kind of like the W600s). Though Horner is not credited anywhere on these, there's no doubt that he go paid for the use of the image-- as copyrights and payments for use were just as important back then as they are today.

[Archive]

Posted By: t-206collector

If I was searching for "horner cabinets" on ebay, what would I call them?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

They're known as 'Horner Cabinets' or 'Horner Cabinet Cards.' Technically, the big ones (white bordered pictures affixed to about 8x10" dark cardboard mounts) are not cabinet cards, but that's what they're popularly called (Simularly, the W600s and the T3 Turkey Reds are not cabinet cards, though the T5 Pinkertons are) ... If you ever see one of the littler ones with Horner's credit embossed on the mount below the real b&w photo and the photo has no white border, those are super expensive. I think MastroNet auctioned an Addie Joss one of these for something like $7-9,000 (+ or - depnding on the accuracy of my memory), though original photos of Joss are particularly rare in the first place due to his early death. The little ones are true cabinet cards.

And if you want super expensive, Horner made some monster-sized composite photos for various early 1900s leagues, each photo picturing little vignettes of like 100 different players. A fine example of one of these might sell for over $20,000, and I don't think I've ever seen one on eBay. His name is printed on these, so it's easy to identify as his production.

So, due to the extreme rarity, high quality and famous poses (such as the one used to make the T206 Honus Wagner), Horner was like the tiffany of early 1900s baseball photos.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

In a way it's kind of funny. Few baseball card collectors have heard of the name Carl Horner, but more baseball cards and memorabilia was made from Horner's images than Charles Conlon's.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I think almost all pre-wwi card collectors have heard of both CONLON and HORNER. Horner was a great portrait photographer, but there were others out there who were just as good. Horner is more well-known than the others simply because he took more photographs of ML baseball players - virtually all of them. Take a look at the Boston Beaneater cabinets from the 1890's - I will argue that the photographer of those did much better work than Horner. Same for the Boston Red Stockings cdv's from the 1870's. And these guys had a tougher time than Horner did in the early 1900's.

Conlon is more popular because he took photographs that involved more than simply a head, and in an age where that wasn't so easy to do, he was a master. He also took phenomenal action shots, which was especially difficult - just look at the famous Cobb/Austin photo as an example. If you want just a hint of how great Conlon really was, pick up "Baseball's Golden Age". It just became available in soft-cover, but you'll want the hard-cover permanent copy.

Having said all that, I would still gladly pay a premium for a nice hardcover copy of Horner's studio portraits.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

There are a lot of great photographers from many eras. But for collectors on a normal budget and/or casual attitude towards photographs, I recommend Goerge Burke. He shot the images for the 1930s Goudeys and was the official photographer for the Cubs, White Sox and the NFL's Bears. His photos are of high quality and consistancy, but, due to the much larger amount on the market, his photos are very affordable and findable. Most are from the 1930s, 8x10" or postcard sized. The best thing is that they are easy to authenticate as vintage. If the back has stamped his name with 807 Belmont Ave/ Chicago address and some sort of catalonging info typed at the top (usually player's name and a serial number), the photo is vintage. I think he died around 1950, so he never made modern photos.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Also, looking at those George Grantham Baine photos at the LOA, he had to be one of the greatest baseball photographers ever. Some of those photos are incredible.

Baine's are pretty straightforeward to authenticate as well. They are usually small (some like snapshots), and will have his name or 'Baine News Service' stamped on the back. I beleive he died either during or just before WWII and the Baine News Service dissapeared, so the two mentioned stamps are signficant. Many also will have a 'Culver' stamp, with Culver being an photo archives that later owned many of the photos. Baine's photos are tough to find, but not always so expensive.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

I've sold a lot of sports (and non sport) photos. About 20 percent of the buyer are die hard photo collectors (know what ACME and all that stuff means) and the rest think such and such is a nice photo to go along with their collection-- i.e. a non-photo expert Chicago Bears fan buys the AP Willie Galimore photo to display with his cards and pennants and autographed Mike Ditka helmet. Of the later majority, most want a image that strikes them as cool and to be assured that the photo is original, vintage or otherwise 'official' (a stamp by the Chicago Tribune of Associated Press or on the back would make it official). And, noting that I don't collect vintage Bears photos, I can't say that their expectations are much different than mine as a collector.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

the same expectations, but if the image is nice enough, it doesn't have to be original, as long as I know it isn't.
Conlon's often have TWO stamps of his on the back (N.Y. and New Jersey)
I have a anonymous photo of Buck Weaver and Eddie Cicotte clowning around in the dugout,print made in 2000 from an original photo that seller decided at the last minute not to sell me!

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Agreed. Many later generation photos (Ex: a 1955 photo showing Babe Ruth in 1922) are perfectly collectable, if much less expensive, as long as the buyer knows it's later generation. Typically, for these to retain some value, the later generation would have to come from a substantial source (ala Associated Press or George Brace) as opposed to a nobody who found the negatives. In some cases, like a later UPI photo, the later generation photo can in and of itself be very rare. But, I totally agree that buying what you thought was an original, and finding out it's later generation is no fun.

Interestingly, in the high end find arts, later generation photos are much more accepted. For example, a years after photo Ansel Adams made from the original negative can have great value. If you look at a Christies or Sotheby's photo auction (where minimum bids are often $30,000 and more), you will find many later generation photos by famous artists. Whether you agree or disagree, the sentiment with many fine art collectors is that if it's made from the original negative by the artist, the date of the photo doesn't detract from the value. When I first started looking into these photos, this sentiment struck me.

Vintage baseball or Hollywood or Civil War collectors are collecting historical artifacts, so vintage is much more important. And if you hear a discussion between collectors of vintage baseball or Hollywood memorabilia, you will notice that a large portion of the discussion is about history and not just memorabilia.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

One very last point, for those who are wondering, "That's all fine and good, but how am I supposed to know which is original and which is later generation?"

If you are a normal collector about to spend $10 on photo of Lou Boudreau that has an 'official' stamp on or tag on it (Associated Press, George Brace), and you don't know if it's an original from 1940 or a later generation image from 1960 ... If the image is to your liking, it's not a huge deal. Whether it's 1940 or 1960, $10 is a decent price. This is particularly true as all news service photos are limited, even if they are later generation. They were for production puroses only, and not distributed to the public like baseball cards or programs .... It's when you start spending $100 or $200 for a photo that you should do more homework.

So, if a newbie sees sharp $15 or $20 Hank Greenberg AP Wirephoto on eBay that would look great next to Greenberg signed baseball, there's no reason to hesitate from bidding on it. Even if it turns out to be later generation, the photo is limited, collectable and you probably still paid a decent price.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

And for you wire photo anectdote of the day: About a year or two ago I met the head of the photo archives for one of Britain's largest news services and, in his younger days, a wirephoto technician for AP. According to him, he said that the Holy Grail of wirephotos is the original showing that 1989 Beijing student stopping the tank in Tieneman Square. He said that, due to a technical glitch in the process, only one original hard copy was made and exists.

[Archive]

Posted By: Patrick McMenemy

My personal favorite photographer is Paul Thompson.

Here are two examples from my small photo collection. Both of my Paul Thompson photos are of A's catcher, Ira Thomas. The autographed photo with Connie Mack was taken at the 1911 World Series.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

..and to blazes with the guy who owns the original!

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

This is a non-original photo that one MIGHT just pay a chunk of change for...

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

To note, when my baseball card book comes out again in paper form, it will include a chapter on the famous baseball photographers (photographers who's stamp give a significant premium in value) and how to identify their originals (ala the above stamping descriptions of Burke & Brace) ... It's something I should have done originally, but never thought of it.

[springfever9]

Since 1999 I have had a Horner photo of the Burdett College (Boston) team circa 1890s. Photo is 13 1/2" x 10 1/2', and is period framed to 17" x 15". The college closed in 1999. Horner's name is on the matting and also within the photo as Horner Phil., Boston. Always like it and valued it at a few hundred $. Last month, however, I found a Horner composite photo of the 1907 New York Nationals with 18 players including Hall of Famers: Roger Bresnahan, Joe McGinnity, and Christy Mathewson. John McGraw's photo is in the center. The piece is 16 1/2" x 14" and is framed to 27 1/2" x 23 1/2". I am certainly hoping that it is original as it would have considerable value.
If there is anyone out here that could evaluate both photos, I can send pictures. My email is springfvr9@aol.com

Bob

[doug.goodman]

Sounds neat, can you post a picture.

Doug


PS - apologies for the potential hijack of this thread, but that Archive guy really pisses me off.

And, I miss all of the Bruces...

[lumberjack]

RMY Auctions has three Horner originals (not mounted) in his latest auction. If you check his archive, there have been a number of Horner originals for sale over the last year or so. You might want to check them out to see what the originals sell for. Nice images, although my wife says they remind her of Terry Gilliam's animated work with Monty Python. She expects the jaws to swing open and the subjects to start singing.

The Christie's East auction of BB Magazine photos in 1996 had a number of mounted Horner's and was deep in HOFers. Those are the most I have ever seen in one place at one time. That catalog turns up on eBay occasionally.

Thompson's dugout portraits, c. 1910, are really beautiful, but while there may have been a Paul Thompson, his stamp appears on a lot of photos that appear to have been taken by other photographers. Many of them are dead-on Conlon poses. Thompson's stamp often appears on Harris and Ewing photos, which were taken in Washington, D.C.

My feeling is, while there may have been a Paul Thompson running a photo agency, he wasn't taking the photos any more than the Fisher Brothers were standing on an assembly line in Detroit making car bodies for General Motors.

Re. Conlon....Conlon moved to New Jersey sometime in the late 1920s, hence the occasional two address stamps on the reverse of his early prints.
lumberjack

[Leon]

+1

Old threads can still be enlightening and entertaining. I am sticking with Horner though I only have 1 photo in my collection...

Originally Posted by Archive

Posted By: Hankron

In a way it's kind of funny. Few baseball card collectors have heard of the name Carl Horner, but more baseball cards and memorabilia was made from Horner's images than Charles Conlon's.

[BeanTown]

LMK, when you get tired of having that awesome piece Leon.

[RCMcKenzie]

That's a really cool piece, Leon. I have this colorized Cobb from a Horner photo...

[Leon]

Nice Cobby and classic portrait. Here is another Horner type too, I believe...

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

That's a really cool piece, Leon. I have this colorized Cobb from a Horner photo...