Gambo and T_Wil1 Photopack

[cheech411]

[Braves70]

Originally Posted by cheech411

anything color on don?? thanks

We had the one 1956 Cubs Don Hoak that we posted here: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...post18942.html

[okcochise]

We did this one for Don Hoak with the Cubs awhile back. Originally, Keonleafs provided a black and white photo of Hoak with the Montreal Royals. FrostyMalt colorized it and changed it to the Chicago Cubs.

[cheech411]

very nice!!! THANKS FOR YOUR TIME!!!

[Marisfor HOF]

Anyone know who the pitcher is between Art Ditmar and Bob Turley?

[Braves70]

Yankees photos from the 1950s

Bob Turley (1955 Photo) / Elston Howard (1955 Photo) / Enos Slaughter (Unknown Date Photo) / Gil McDougald (1952 Sport Mag) / Allie Reynolds (Unknown Date Photo)

[Marisfor HOF]

Sorry, the photo didn't attach. Fourth from the right between Turley and Ditmar -- looks like the autograph on another similar photo says Rudy something.

[ortforshort]

Originally Posted by FatJack

History Schmistory. Topps is a for-profit company in the business of making money. They aren't "providing" anything to anybody, for preservation or otherwise, unless its bought and paid for.

At the rate they're selling these overpriced pics, they'll take most of them to the grave. Which, apparently, the greedy b..s are more than willing to do. We need an honorable ToppsLeaks guy to come out and do the right thing for the masses

[FatJack]

Originally Posted by ortforshort

At the rate they're selling these overpriced pics, they'll take most of them to the grave. Which, apparently, the greedy b..s are more than willing to do. We need an honorable ToppsLeaks guy to come out and do the right thing for the masses

Hey, look, I'm not saying I agree with the philosophy, but it is the country we live in. When someone figures out how to charge us for air, they will. As it is, I'm very appreciative to Topps. Unlike a lot of other companies (say the one with the big rat that makes movies and music), Topps seems to have an understanding of the symbiotic relationship they have with their audience/customers (not counting the old "collectors are lint in our pocket" remark). And what I mean by that is this: they would be on solid legal footing if they ever decided to go after all the blogs that picture their trading cards, all the creative types who make their own cards using Topps designs and forums like this one showing Topps Vault pictures (with or without watermark). They don't. They leave it be. They understand the promotion is worth it. We live in an age where every file sharing service is hunted to extinction (even when doing so requires "extra-leagal" methods) and where artists of every stripe have the works THEY created and posted themselves pulled down for supposed copyright infringement.

So if Topps leaves me alone, I'll take whatever they put out whenever they put it out. Sure, I'd love to have access to their entire collection. But its their collection. Those pictures didn't magically appear in their vaults; Topps paid to have them taken. To say they have some kind of obligation to give it up or share it--even with SABR or the Hall of Fame--is, in my mind, no different than demanding Paul McCartney turn over any unreleased Beatles demos and work tapes. Gratis. Hey, its history, afterall.

[Braves70]

Originally Posted by Marisfor HOF

Sorry, the photo didn't attach. Fourth from the right between Turley and Ditmar -- looks like the autograph on another similar photo says Rudy something.

I see the 1957 Yankees had 12 pitchers who played for them that year. That matches the 12 players shown. Let's see if we can name them all.

I would say that:
#1 is Bobby Shantz
#2 is Whitey Ford
#3 is I believe Tommy Byrne
#4 is Tom Sturdivant
#5 is Bob Grim
#6 is Sal Maglie
#7 is Al Cicotte
#8 is Art Ditmar
#9 is the Mystery Man
#10 is Bob Turley
#11 is Johnny Kucks
#12 is Don Larsen

The only 1957 pitcher not accounted for is Ralph Terry who was only 21 that year. Could the Mystery Man be Ralph Terry? I attach a 1961 Topps Vault Ralph Terry for comparison.

[tnfoto]

Originally Posted by Marisfor HOF

Sorry, the photo didn't attach. Fourth from the right between Turley and Ditmar -- looks like the autograph on another similar photo says Rudy something.

SABR tells me that it may be Rudy Riska, a non-roster invitee to spring training 1957. If nothing else, Riska is a fascinating fellow.

[Braves70]

Yankees images from 1962 or 1963

Billy Gardner (1962 Photo) / Jake Gibbs (1962 Photo) / Bud Daley (1963 Topps Vault) / Bill Kunkel (1963 Topps Vault) / Tony Kubek (1963 Topps Vault)

[ortforshort]

Originally Posted by FatJack

Hey, look, I'm not saying I agree with the philosophy, but it is the country we live in. When someone figures out how to charge us for air, they will. As it is, I'm very appreciative to Topps. Unlike a lot of other companies (say the one with the big rat that makes movies and music), Topps seems to have an understanding of the symbiotic relationship they have with their audience/customers (not counting the old "collectors are lint in our pocket" remark). And what I mean by that is this: they would be on solid legal footing if they ever decided to go after all the blogs that picture their trading cards, all the creative types who make their own cards using Topps designs and forums like this one showing Topps Vault pictures (with or without watermark). They don't. They leave it be. They understand the promotion is worth it. We live in an age where every file sharing service is hunted to extinction (even when doing so requires "extra-leagal" methods) and where artists of every stripe have the works THEY created and posted themselves pulled down for supposed copyright infringement.

So if Topps leaves me alone, I'll take whatever they put out whenever they put it out. Sure, I'd love to have access to their entire collection. But its their collection. Those pictures didn't magically appear in their vaults; Topps paid to have them taken. To say they have some kind of obligation to give it up or share it--even with SABR or the Hall of Fame--is, in my mind, no different than demanding Paul McCartney turn over any unreleased Beatles demos and work tapes. Gratis. Hey, its history, afterall.

Disagree Fat Jack. If any of us were making any money out of any of this, they'd be all over us like white on rice. As it is, not making a nickel out of any of it, what will they sue us for, air?

[Merkle923]

That's your missing Yankee pitcher ID there.

Serrett was a left-handed New Yorker - from Flushing - signed by the Yankees that summer and called up just after his 18th birthday, around September 9, 1957. One assumes the promotion was part of his deal because a) he showed nothing particular in his minor league debut at Peoria, b) he would never pitch in a big league game, and c) he never again rose past AA.

Serrett was on the roster. He shows up on Yankee scorecards from that September and actually is on a Topps card - the 1958 Yankee Team Card.

[Merkle923]

He got his own publicity photos too. This would be from spring training, 1958.

[FatJack]

Originally Posted by ortforshort

Disagree Fat Jack. If any of us were making any money out of any of this, they'd be all over us like white on rice. As it is, not making a nickel out of any of it, what will they sue us for, air?

It is irrelevant to copyright law (AND to most copyright holders) whether or not you make money from "unauthorized use or reproduction". Ask any mp3 blog. What is relevant to copyright law is whether THEY (the copyright holder) are making any money. According to copyright law, any unauthorized useage of their owned materials deprives them of revenue whether or not you make any yourself and regardless of your intentions. What would they "sue" you for? Ask this poor woman.

[cheech411]

found this online

[cheech411]

from orf pic

[Braves70]

Thanks for the info on our mystery man Rudy Serrett. I googled him and found a page of photos dedicated to "players who wore the pinstripes but never appeared in a game" (with the Yankees).

Many enjoyable and rare photos. If the page belongs to anyone who visits this site regularly, thank you for sharing this treasure trove of Yankees photos. Well done!

Players A-L: New York Yankees Prospects A-L
Players M-Z: New York Yankees Prospects M-Z
Giant collection of various Yankees: New York Highlanders 1903-1905

[ortforshort]

Originally Posted by FatJack

It is irrelevant to copyright law (AND to most copyright holders) whether or not you make money from "unauthorized use or reproduction". Ask any mp3 blog. What is relevant to copyright law is whether THEY (the copyright holder) are making any money. According to copyright law, any unauthorized useage of their owned materials deprives them of revenue whether or not you make any yourself and regardless of your intentions. What would they "sue" you for? Ask this poor woman.

You have a point. In our litigious and corporate friendly society anybody can sue anybody for anything no matter how unreasonable and win, particularly if it's a corporation against a little guy.
So, from that point of view, we're all at risk no matter what we do or don't do.
Luckily, there isn't much of a market for the things posted here. If it doesn't come with an authentic autograph or if it's not an original negative, it's not worth much and has very little demand. Topps would lose money on any litigation because it would cost them more to sue than what little money these items could possibly bring in. The only people who seem to want these things are the handful of folks who frequent this site and it's a huge leap from looking at them to actually ever wanting to plunk down any money to buy them.