Could this be the original image used for Stan Musials 1949 leaf?

[Lucas00]

First off let me start with some similarities. Jersey, swing and pants are essentially identical to the leaf image in terms of positioning. Overall his body positioning is also identical. Red highlighted areas on the card all match up (jersey number, pants, Sleeve).

Now the differences I see, His swing/bat is at a slightly higher angle than his leaf card (I know I said it was the same but I'm talking about the bat height rather than swing angle). His mouth is closed on his leaf card.

How much were the cards edited from the original photos? Is this possibly the image used? I cant say one way or the other for certain myself. I cannot find the original photo anywhere.

In any case it seemed like something fun to share.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Clearly not the same image. Could there have been another one that was snapped a second later? I could see that being the case.

[Swadewade51]

I believe it's the same shoot just seconds later or earlier. Belt loop angled away from the camera and bat being dropped indicates more follow through than the Leaf image?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Not seeing them even as related. Look at the gap between the large belt "pocket" and the belt loops on one there is almost no gap, on the other it's easily an inch or more of exposed belt showing. The hand position arm height, mouth open versus mouth closed, bat angle, all say to me that it's not something taken a fraction of a second later in the same swing.

[Bpm0014]

No. Simply look at his hands in relation to the back of his head/neck...

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

How much were the cards edited from the original photos?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I would expect a Leaf card to perfectly match the photo. The Leafs use the actual photo, and then apply the color layers on top of the photo to make part and only part of the picture to be 'in color'. It's not like a T206 or something where there is a base photograph used for the model, but the image is art made by an artist based on the photo, and thus small changes sometimes made.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by G1911

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I would expect a Leaf card to perfectly match the photo. The Leafs use the actual photo, and then apply the color layers on top of the photo to make part and only part of the picture to be 'in color'. It's not like a T206 or something where there is a base photograph used for the model, but the image is art made by an artist based on the photo, and thus small changes sometimes made.

appears to me they are 1-1 after finding a few football original photos used for the set

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Not seeing them even as related. Look at the gap between the large belt "pocket" and the belt loops on one there is almost no gap, on the other it's easily an inch or more of exposed belt showing. The hand position arm height, mouth open versus mouth closed, bat angle, all say to me that it's not something taken a fraction of a second later in the same swing.

My main question should've been did leaf edit photos to make the cards. They do not. I do still think the photo was taken at the same time though. The pose and angle are just too exact with the matching uniform. The belt difference is easily explained by Stan simply turning more/"swinging" harder making his clothes slightly tighter and pull more hiding the belt.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

My main question should've been did leaf edit photos to make the cards. They do not. I do still think the photo was taken at the same time though. The pose and angle are just too exact with the matching uniform. The belt difference is easily explained by Stan simply turning more/"swinging" harder making his clothes slightly tighter and pull more hiding the belt.

Not that it's important but I gave a lot of reasons in addition to the belt, but even if the belt was all I gave; His body angle/twist is almost the same there's little to no additional torquing to change the spot I pointed out.

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Not that it's important but I gave a lot of reasons in addition to the belt, but even if the belt was all I gave; His body angle/twist is almost the same there's little to no additional torquing to change the spot I pointed out.

I mentioned them all in my op already, about his bat and face. I disagree with you about how much he's turned, he's clearly turning harder hence his face and more wrinkled clothes/higher bat but I'm not going to argue about it.

The fact it's basically an identical pose with the card (very similar at least), same uniform and all just points to it being from the same shoot. I don't think that will change In my mind unless the original photo is discovered proving otherwise.