Gambo and T_Wil1 Photopack

[FatJack]

Always nice to see a new Denny McLain image from his post-Tigers period. He pitched only 5 games for Oakland in 1972. (Some color correction attempted)

[Merkle923]

There were some more Expos images posted of this short-career batter, but more importantly, two in a uniform I've never seen before, the Padres - with whom he closed out his career in 1977.

[cheech411]

found on e bay credit goes to fatjack he found it I don't want to lose this photo reason im placing it on ootp

[Buccos]

Who is this guy?

When I downloaded it a couple years ago (I forget where), he was identified as Harding Peterson. Nope, it's not him.

Thanks for your help!

[Keith_Loving]

Originally Posted by krantzbucks

Frenchy Bordagaray with the St Louis Cardinals circa 1938.

This colorized photo of Frenchy Bordagaray is simply amazing.

[FatJack]

Originally Posted by Buccos.com

Who is this guy?

When I downloaded it a couple years ago (I forget where), he was identified as Harding Peterson. Nope, it's not him.

Thanks for your help!

I could be wrong, but it looks like Bill Koski to me, a guy I did a custom card of last year (at Baseball Birthdays) upon his passing. Bill was a pitcher and you don't often see pitchers posing with lumber, but the eyebrows and facial structure look the same to me. Comparison photo (and custom) attached.

[Dto7]

Originally Posted by Buccos.com

Who is this guy?

When I downloaded it a couple years ago (I forget where), he was identified as Harding Peterson. Nope, it's not him.

Thanks for your help!

Looks a little like Preston Ward

[BklynJace]

That Topps Vault batting pose of Billy Baldwin as a Met -- a shot I never dared to imagine existed -- went for $107.51 on eBay. I bid, but knew it would wind up too rich for my blood, and I was right. Shucks.

I know it's a fantasy, but if only Topps would offer digital photos from their archives the way they do with selected prints. I'd make myself poor at, say, $25 a shot.

[hobbs11]

Originally Posted by BklynJace

That Topps Vault batting pose of Billy Baldwin as a Met -- a shot I never dared to imagine existed -- went for $107.51 on eBay. I bid, but knew it would wind up too rich for my blood, and I was right. Shucks.

I know it's a fantasy, but if only Topps would offer digital photos from their archives the way they do with selected prints. I'd make myself poor at, say, $25 a shot.

Question for you BklyJace, as I think tnfoto stated this weeks back on why people come back to OOTP for images. (Albeit for their sim replays, custom cards, etc.) So just curious - what's the hook for buying the image itself as offered on eBay? Is it truly the collecting part?

[Buccos]

>> what's the hook for buying the image itself

I know of two possibilities:

1. One guy I know, is a huge Jerry May fan and collector. So, he just *had* to buy a Topps card negative, to enhance his Jerry May collection.

2. Apparently, Billy Baldwin Mets photos are scarce. By now owning the negative, the auction winner can make sharp Mets 8x10s of Billy Baldwin.

I know if I collected 8x10s, I would bid on these negatives as well.

[FatJack]

Originally Posted by Buccos.com

>> what's the hook for buying the image itself

I know of two possibilities:

1. One guy I know, is a huge Jerry May fan and collector. So, he just *had* to buy a Topps card negative, to enhance his Jerry May collection.

2. Apparently, Billy Baldwin Mets photos are scarce. By now owning the negative, the auction winner can make sharp Mets 8x10s of Billy Baldwin.

I know if I collected 8x10s, I would bid on these negatives as well.

I'm anxious to hear from BklynJace on this but, speaking for myself....

You search and search and search for years for a decent image of a certain player (for me, it was Leon Brown). At some point, you sort of give up and your heart sinks a little bit.

And then, suddenly, there it is!

You are overwhelmed by a highly illogical "need" to own it. "I must have this so that I never ever ever have to think about it not existing ever again." You at least have to try. Being neither rich nor (completely) insane, Jace didn't get the Baldwin and I didn't get the Brown. And that is (probably) a good thing.

I have, as a Mets collector, purchased a few of these in the past (usually when they've passed through the initial offer and come back as "buy-it-now"). They aren't really negatives in the classic sense and I don't have the equipment to do anything with them. I always look at them and say "What the heck am I going to do with this?" And I end up giving them away to player collectors (as a player collector, 1 of 1 anything is a wonderful get).

To sum up....there is no real logic or purpose in collecting. The passion is controlling the intellect. It just is.

[FatJack]

A few new Schnecks in the latest Vault release.

[BklynJace]

Re Baldwin, the actual slide wasn't important to me -- it was the only way to get the image.

I love both the Mets and vintage baseball cards, and a while back I started making custom cards for the cup-of-coffee guys who never got their own Mets cards, only shared a card with other rookies, etc. I don't sell or share these -- I have no wish to anger Topps. it's a weirdo personal hobby that satisfies my OCD impulses. I can create something that didn't exist but my heart insists should have, and filling that weird little void makes me happy.

Baldwin's one of the tougher missing Mets -- I was surprised to see Topps had even shot him -- and the actual slide would have let me make a great card. This will sound goofy, but to me there's something quite distinctive -- magical, even -- about a real Topps image. I don't have the photographic vocabulary to explain why, but you can spot one at a glance.

I have seen TV images reappear a few months later as 8x10s signed by players (I've even bought a few), but I hope the Baldwin slide went to a collector who loves obscure Mets, Topps photography, Billy Baldwin, whatever -- someone like Buccos.com's friend who loves Jerry May. (BTW, Jerry May is another awfully tough obscure Met.)

That said, when I bought a TV image of Don Rowe I got this with it. Which, as a lover of baseball-card history, was an awfully cool bonus.

[BklynJace]

Aw heck, FatJack said it a lot better than I did.

Love > Logic.

Heck, by the 4th inning Logic has a position player on the mound.

[hobbs11]

Originally Posted by BklynJace

Re Baldwin, the actual slide wasn't important to me -- it was the only way to get the image.

I love both the Mets and vintage baseball cards, and a while back I started making custom cards for the cup-of-coffee guys who never got their own Mets cards, only shared a card with other rookies, etc. I don't sell or share these -- I have no wish to anger Topps. it's a weirdo personal hobby that satisfies my OCD impulses. I can create something that didn't exist but my heart insists should have, and filling that weird little void makes me happy.

Baldwin's one of the tougher missing Mets -- I was surprised to see Topps had even shot him -- and the actual slide would have let me make a great card. This will sound goofy, but to me there's something quite distinctive -- magical, even -- about a real Topps image. I don't have the photographic vocabulary to explain why, but you can spot one at a glance.

I have seen TV images reappear a few months later as 8x10s signed by players (I've even bought a few), but I hope the Baldwin slide went to a collector who loves obscure Mets, Topps photography, Billy Baldwin, whatever -- someone like Buccos.com's friend who loves Jerry May. (BTW, Jerry May is another awfully tough obscure Met.)

That said, when I bought a TV image of Don Rowe I got this with it. Which, as a lover of baseball-card history, was an awfully cool bonus.

Makes sense.....thanks for taking the time!

[hobbs11]

Originally Posted by BklynJace

This will sound goofy, but to me there's something quite distinctive -- magical, even -- about a real Topps image. I don't have the photographic vocabulary to explain why, but you can spot one at a glance.
.

As a custom card 'recipient' and where my personal collection is well, just that, this hits home very very well. Many of us have seen a pic of 1972 Padres pitcher Mark Schaeffer.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ml#post3339546

Yet when a pic likes this is then released by the gods of Topps, I say to myself, "That beats the custom card image that I had created." It's like a wise man named Simarc once stated to me - "Better is better."

[Merkle923]

As obscure an outfielder as you're likely to find in the Topps Vault - seven games with the 1971 Astros and then a second stint with the 1974 Cardinals in which he never appeared in a game - but Doug McWilliams still photographed him for Topps at Candlestick Park.

The Astro image first.

[Merkle923]

The Cardinal image. I don't have the data in front of me but as I recall it, he was either never officially added to the St. Louis roster, or was only in it for a day or two.

[Merkle923]

Got onto two rookie cards and one card issued after his career was over.

The Padres images look to date from spring training 1973.

[Merkle923]

An original Blue Jay.