1886 Poughkeepsie Cabinet - look a little odd?

Does this cabinet look strange to anyone else? Personally I've never seen a 19th century cabinet resembling this one. Could it be just a woodcut pasted onto a cabinet card backing. Any input is appreciated.

Ben, I agree that is a strange looking cabinet. It does look original, though I am troubled by the weird cut on the top left.

I've never seen a cabinet like that, why would a studio put out a cabinet thats not a photo.
The right edge looks a little ragged also.
Just seems kinda strange to me but for wiser minds than mine to determine.

Ben:

Oddly enough, I have the same image in color on what appears to be a larger print (?).

The top reads "Safe at Home - 1878".

An advertisement is also found on it which says "Kessler's Private Blend Whiskey - Smooth as Silk".

There is a stamp in the lower right hand corner saying: "From the Private Collection of Mr. Julius Kessler."

I really don't know if this helps, I just have never seen the image before until you posted your cabinet.

Will post a picture later on tonight if that works.

My best,

Turner Engle


Edited to say after a quick search, this is what I have:

http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=23&lot_num=542&lot_qual=

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the detective work, Turner. You're right, the image is identical. But when you compare the two pieces, a few notable differences bring the origin of the "cabinet" into question.

The color print reads "safe at home - 1878"
The cabinet reads "Tom McDermott's Winning Slide" and below it, "Kingston vs. Poughkeepsie, 1886."

Why does the same scene have different dates/events associated with it? Maybe the image doesn't actually depict McDermott's winning slide but instead just a generic baseball scene, and the cabinet maker liked the image enough to use it anyway.

The Hunt auction states that the color print was produced circa 1940 (although the image is certainly from the 19th century). There likely isn't any connection between the two pieces, but I still question whether or not the Poughkeepsie cabinet is truly a legit 19th century piece.

OK I'll stop blabbering now

Hmm I should have looked harder. The images aren't identical. But they are close enough to make me believe they were derived from the same generic source image. It has a very Harpers Woodcut feel to it, doesn't it?



(Most noticeably different in the outfield stands, sliding player's dust, and catcher's right foot)

What troubles me most about this item is that the image is poorly cut. this is most noticable on the upper left (as pro9 indicated) and the right edge also wavers a bit (as TheBig6 stated), and the bottom edge appears to have A hitch in the cut. Also, the image is a trapezoid, being wider at the top, than at the bottom:

Hello all,

I could be way off here, but weren't cabinets made by photographers to mount a photograph on? Why would a professional photographer mount an image like this, that isn't even a photo, on one of his mounts with his name on it? I don't believe this is a real cabinet at all. Where did the scan come from?

Thanks,

AndyH

Good point Andy. I think you are spot on. HERE is where it came from.

If you look closely the faces of the sliding plyers are different. The photographer probably took McDermott's head and pasted it on the slider to make the image work for him.
-Rhett

rhettyeakley wrote:The photographer probably took McDermott's head and pasted it on the slider to make the image work for him.

Makes sense. What are your thoughts on the piece in general Rhett? Is it legit?

I like Rhett's explanation. Within the past year I saw an example of a Cabinet card where they took a man's face and posted it on a player's body. The strange bit was that it was a Virginia Brights (woman's) body.

...cabinet is a modern repro. The style of the art doesn't seem period to me, and I don't like the casual way the head appears to have been pasted on the runner sliding home.

FWIW, my opinion is that the cab is period. I doubt a modern reprint would have such a crude insertion of the face of the player. I like Rhett's explanation.

I agree that the cabinet is period, and Rhett's explanation makes sense as well. But I still question the overall legitimacy of the piece. As others have suggested, I suspect that it was originally two separate pieces, and that the Pougheepsie premium/woodcut was later glued onto the cabinet backing.

The fact that it's a cabinet but the image is not photographic is the immediate combined with those jagged edges....highly questionable imo.

I would have liked to see the piece in person before passing judgement as to whether the piece was period or not. 19th century photographers were pretty creative people and this piece could very well be totally period, but there are a few things about it that look a little "off". That being said, it was a pretty neat item regardless.
-Rhett