May 10, 2012, 08:53 PM
Okay, great! Please let us work on what you claim and see if we can find some information to support it and possibly lead to something. I admit I can't see what you see, but will try and make some sense of it anyway.
I use what's called "Internet Explorer Photo Gallery" which allows me to work with photos in various ways. Every picture I've posted of the photo and frame were done with a scanner. I experimented with various resolutions ranging from 200 to 2400. The following is the best I can do at 2400. I'm not very good at this photo stuff and likely will not mess with it anymore. That's something for an expert to do, which definitely isn't me.
2400 resolution and darkened to help make the words readable.
Last edited by SODABOTTLEBOB; May 10, 2012 at 08:58 PM.
May 10, 2012 08:53 PM
May 10, 2012, 09:03 PM
You see "1888" and he sees "Purina". There is a big difference, so somebody is wrong.. He also sees nothing at all on the backside and neither do I.
Originally Posted by Franklin
You are using words like "definitely" and "correct" but it seems you are just guessing. What happened to the words "Montgomery Texas"?
An arrow pointing on the backside may help point Bob, or anyone else, to look harder in the proper place.. Something is very wrong here.
May 10, 2012, 09:08 PM
Ok thats more like it. At least I have an idea what you are talking about. I wish we could enlarge it. The way you are posting we cannot easily click on it to enlarge.
Originally Posted by Here is the back of the frame best I could show it says "Vanquest" "350 W" Then TRO that's all I can see besides the XxK[ATTACH=CONFIG
I see the XxK but it could just as well be scratches. I dont see the Vanquest, maybe Bob at least will know where to look now. Thanks.
Last edited by Bigcypresshunter; May 10, 2012 at 09:11 PM.
May 10, 2012, 09:14 PM
May 10, 2012, 09:14 PM
I just wanted to make sure you were posting at the highest resolution.. Well Franklin told you were Vanquest is so maybe you can find the scratches that look like XxK and look above it.
Originally Posted by SODABOTTLEBOB
May 10, 2012, 09:25 PM
I decided to play along. Im posting the XxY enlarged 2x. I also painted the XxY or Xky in the second pic.
I would say its possible we are looking at no more than scratches and I cannot see anything else resembling letters but Ill wait to see what Bob thinks. He has it in person.
Attachment 634447Attachment 634448
Is this on the wood or the paper?
Last edited by Bigcypresshunter; May 10, 2012 at 09:32 PM.
May 10, 2012, 09:39 PM
I hate to disappoint, but the so called marks on the back of the metal are cracks in the paint. Triple click on the picture below or go back to the one I posted on page one and you will be able to see some of the cracks I'm referring to. I assure you, there is no pencil writing on anything. At this juncture I suggest we work with what we already know for certain, which is to try and date it by the style of the uniform, and not rack our brains with intangibles that might and might not exist.
Triple click for best results.
May 10, 2012, 10:07 PM
I didnt know how to triple click. Thats cool.
May 10, 2012, 11:21 PM
After careful consideration and considerable research regarding the evidence presented thus far, I have decided to call it quits on the building and the words on the building and focus 100% of my attention in trying to date the uniform. And irregardless of whether it turns out to be 1880 or 1920, I will be more than happy with whatever date it turns out to be. I realize that determining a date is what Franklin and others (myself included) have tried to do by drawing attention to the building, but since it seems to be confusing us more than helping us, I for one have pretty much reached a dead-end on that particular aspect. So if there is anyone among us now or in the future who is intimately familar with vintage baseball uniforms, please let us know what era it was made by selecting from the following ...
4. Early 1900s
I'm so confused and uncertain myself that I can barely venture a guess. In other words, I honestly don't know what era it was made in, and guessing is getting me nowhere. If and when I hear back from any of the other inquires I sent, you can be certain that I will share that information with the hope that whoever replies really knows their stuff. Surely there's someone in this old world who can accurately date a simple baseball uniform. Don't ya think?
Thanks to each and every individual who participated and took an interest in this crazy, but hopefully educational discussion.
Last edited by SODABOTTLEBOB; May 10, 2012 at 11:42 PM.
May 11, 2012, 12:01 AM
Just for the fun of it I thought I'd include this ...
May 11, 2012, 01:29 AM
IF the building does say Purina, keep in mind that the company wasn't founded until 1894...so that may help you whittle the date down by a few years.
Also, beginning in 1902, the company's name was officially known as the Ralston-Purina Company, and this is the name which appeared on advertisements until 1904, when Purina adopted the famous red checkerboard logo.
So if the building does say Purina, we can estimate the photo to be from between 1894 and 1902.
Last edited by zendog64; May 11, 2012 at 01:34 AM.
May 11, 2012, 09:55 AM
I noticed your capital IF ... an uncertainty or doubt: the big if is whether our plan will work at all ... which is the same thing as a big question mark like this? IF also seems to be the word of the day. What IF the building and sign were still there today and someone had their picture taken in front of it, does that mean years from now that the today picture can be dated just because of the old sign? In other words, the sign might be 1902, but the photo could still have been taken in 1922. And even though the building appears to be in good shape and not delapitated, I have to believe those mills were used for many years after they were built.
Please don't think I'm trying to shoot your suggestion down, because I'm not. I'm only saying that I believe the uniform speaks for itself. But then again, who knows, maybe some high school kid was wearing his grandad's old uniform. Which brings us full circle again to the photo itself and the type of paper and development used. I'm beginning to think the photo itself is our best clue more than anything else, and something I intend to research further and possibly have examined by a photo expert. As it stands now, I am fairly certain its an albumen photograph ... late 1800s, early 1900s.
Thanks again. You have been a great help to this discussion.
Last edited by SODABOTTLEBOB; May 11, 2012 at 09:58 AM.
May 11, 2012, 02:55 PM
Yes, I see what you're trying to say. I guess it could've been any time after 1894 (it could just be an old Purina sign that was never updated), but it wouldn't be pre-1894 because Purina didn't exist.
It's even a shot in the dark trying to guess the age of the photo itself with any degree of accuracy. I could shoot a picture with a 1983 Polaroid Land camera in 2012, but one might easily assume it's an old picture because of the film and camera. And back in the time your photo was taken, cameras weren't made to be "disposable", so an old camera would have been functional for many years.
Even dating the uniform can be tricky, if the player is an amateur. I played high school football in a rural town back in 1996, and was surprised one day when I looked at my shoulder pads and saw that they were made in 1974! So it's not uncommon for high school, college, and amateur athletes to have older equipment, especially in small rural areas.
But I must admit, this is the most fascinating "What Is It" I've seen on this forum for a while
May 11, 2012, 03:22 PM
Im I the only person that sees a big M on the very top? Attachment 634590
....or is it a window?
May 11, 2012, 05:29 PM
Blow this picture up and see if you can see 1888 and below that No.6
You should be able to see it with a magnifying glass.
May 11, 2012, 05:54 PM
Since you "have ways to work on photos not only magnification but everything else", I dont know why you cant blow it up yourself
Originally Posted by Franklin
The way things have been going here lately at TN, I wouldnt be surprised if you find a few members that agree with you. But not I. Sorry.
I see where Bob sees Purina but I think its stretching it too. ( But not as bad as your visions it would be hard to top that) These are not hand written but most likely professional painted and the photo is just too grainy to come to any definite conclusions. (in my opinion)
Last edited by Bigcypresshunter; May 11, 2012 at 06:01 PM.
May 11, 2012, 06:03 PM
I see now where you are seeing 1888 and No. 6 but IMO no way. Its just like seeing letters in the cracking paint or seeing shapes in the clouds..
Last edited by Bigcypresshunter; May 11, 2012 at 06:06 PM.
May 11, 2012, 06:08 PM
What about the M on top dead center? Am I the only one seeing it? Of couse it may be a window or dormer.
May 11, 2012, 06:52 PM
You're right about the earliest possible date IF is says Purina, which we may never know unless it is examined under a microscope that "might" be able to disipher the wording.
Since this is partly a guessing game, my guess is that your big "M" is either windows or a door of some type.
I know you're trying to help and mean well, but unfortuniately we're just not seeing what you're seeing.
I received a reply from the Baseball Hall of Fame Research Department regarding an inquiry I sent them a couple of days ago. A gentleman named Tim responded and said it was a really nice old photo but didn't comment otherwise because he had some questions for me that I intend to answer just as soon as I'm through here. However, he did ask if it would be okay for him to share the pictures with some photo experts he works with. Of course I will be sure to tell him that's a-okay with me. In fact, I will encourage it. Tim didn't have much to say otherwise, at least not yet, but, like me, he thinks the final proof of age will come down to the type of photograph - type of paper - and type of developing process the photo was done with. If it is an albumen as I believe it to be, that will most likely date it to the late 1800s or early 1900s. I already posted a good photo link earlier, which can be found a page or two back. It talks about albumens and various other photo types. Check it out. I believe identifying the age of the photo itself is our last hope Obi Wan Kanobi.
I will let you know what Tim has to say just as soon as I hear back from him.
Thanks again to everyone.
Last edited by SODABOTTLEBOB; May 11, 2012 at 06:57 PM.
May 11, 2012, 07:03 PM
Here's that photo identifying link again for anyone who wants to check it out. Albumens are discussed under number 7)
Link: How to Date, Identify and Authenticate Photographs / Authenticating Photographs (Cycleback.com)
By huntress104 in forum North American Indian Artifacts
Last Post: Aug 30, 2011, 08:53 AM
By larson1951 in forum North American Indian Artifacts
Last Post: Mar 22, 2011, 04:50 PM
By Ifoundit69 in forum Today's Finds!
Last Post: Sep 27, 2008, 04:20 PM
By cntrydncr1 in forum My Best Finds!
Last Post: Jul 10, 2008, 01:01 AM
By tinpan in forum Today's Finds!
Last Post: Feb 18, 2007, 09:55 PM
Search tags for this page
1900 baseball uniforms
1900s baseball cap
baseball team out of wibaux mt in the 1900's
baseball uniforms 1890s
colored schools in 1900
early baseball caps
honus wagner and ty cobb
honus wagner photo 1900
ty cobb and honus wagner
vintage coal region baseball
Click on a term to search for related topics.