A photo mystery

[Jantz]

First off, thank you to any and all who offer this rookie some help. Somewhat of a mystery to me, but probably not for you guys.

I bought a 1939 World series photo two years ago and it appears to me to be an original photo. So recently I'm cruising Ebay and I notice an auction for another original 1939 World Series photo of the exact same shot. My photo measures 8" x 10" while the Ebay seller describes their photo as measuring 9" x 7".

Given the dimensions of the photos, the images are slightly different as you will see by the two photos below. One interesting aspect is that slightly above DiMaggio's cap and slightly below Crosetti's feet faint red lines appear in the exact location of which the other photo is cropped. After looking at my scan, I see the red line can't be seen above DiMaggio's cap, but is visible just above Lombardi's mask in the dirt.

I will post front/back photos below so you can see what all is involved here.

Being a photo rookie, I have a few questions as well.

Are both of these photos original or would either be considered a Type I? Given the fact that mine has column measurements, would mine be the original and the other photo be a transmitted version given that it has a reproduction credit stamp, along with "From Chicago" on the slug? Not looking to sell my photo, just needing some clarification.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Jantz

(My 39 WS photo is first and the Ebay photo following.)

[Dewey]

The ebay photo and slug are stamped 1939. Your photo is stamped 1955 and the attached article reads like a historical retrospective. I'd guess yours is later based on those two things, but I don't really know. An expert will chime in I'm sure.

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by Dewey

The ebay photo and slug are stamped 1939. Your photo is stamped 1955 and the attached article reads like a historical retrospective. I'd guess yours is later based on those two things, but I don't really know. An expert will chime in I'm sure.

Brett

I understand what you are saying, but what about the additional lower portion of my photo and not the Ebay photo. Lombardi's mask is not pictured in the Ebay photo. Basically my photo is a fuller photo while the other is a cropped version, although the right sides of each photo are different as well. Like I said in my initial post, its a mystery to me.

After further review, even both back captions differ. Just noticed this. One mentions Bill Werber, while the other states that Bucky Walters is on the left.

Jantz

[SAllen2556]

I'm no expert but let me take a stab at it. Your photo looks a lot sharper than the ebay one. I wonder if yours was reprinted by the actual newspaper that owned the negative. That would explain the different cropping. Newspapers often went back in their archives to reuse photos for retrospective stories like the one on the back of your photo, and they would have had their original negatives. I know the Detroit News even had a library in the building that housed their stuff. And even though it's an AP photo, I think AP would often get their photos from local newspapers. So I don't think it's technically a Type I, but I like yours better.

[drcy]

One says wirephoto, which isn't type I.

Though, for future reference, originals of the same shot can be sized and cropped differently. Printing from the original negative, the photographer or developer can make different size photos and crop the images in different ways.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by drcy

One says wirephoto, which isn't type I.

Though, for future reference, originals of the same shot can be sized and cropped differently. Printing from the original negative, the photographer or developer can make different size photos and crop the images in different ways.

Exactly. The cropping has nothing to do with it being more or less original than another ; particularly in this case.



Also, clarity was mentioned here.

A). The op's example was scanned and the other is a picture taken from a camera , at an angle , not even flat.

B) there can be differences in clarity between 2 originals off the original negative anyway.