Photomatch?

[MikeKam]

Have these Lewis gloves and I believe I have photo matched them to this photo from September 7th, 2003.

You can notice that the right index finger has uneven cutting of the gloves as do mine. The right middle finger in the picture still has a touch of "plastic/leather" or whatever it is at the top before the cut, which is also seen in my pair. Also you can see the difference in height/where it was cut in the photo between the right middle finger and right ring finger.

Would you consider this a photo match?

[MikeKam]

Re: Photomatch?

More pictures:

[Roady]

Re: Photomatch?

I thought I found his white suit at a goodwill one time. But the blood splatter didn't match.

[Roady]

Re: Photomatch?

Seriously though, it looks like the right hand index finger has a split in it. I can't tell by your pics if yours does too. I would see if it has that split first.

[MikeKam]

Re: Photomatch?

Seriously though, it looks like the right hand index finger has a split in it. I can't tell by your pics if yours does too. I would see if it has that split first.

Is this what you mean?

[Roady]

Re: Photomatch?

I don't know.
I am talking about the circled part.
Looking at it again I am not sure it is split or just folded down.
It is so hard to photomatch gloves. Maybe someone with better eyes than me can weigh in.

[Roady]

Re: Photomatch?

Looks like it is slit though.

[MikeKam]

Re: Photomatch?

Looks like it is slit though.

Isn't that just the material you're referring to? The index has the "leather/plastic" rather than just the fabric.

I do agree, it is really hard to match haha. A really nice large photo would help

[MikeKam]

Re: Photomatch?

I don't know.
I am talking about the circled part.
Looking at it again I am not sure it is split or just folded down.
It is so hard to photomatch gloves. Maybe someone with better eyes than me can weigh in.

I noticed also that if you look at his left hand there seems to be a "slit" or "split" or whatever you want to call the separation of the stitching on his index finger. My glove has the split, not sure if thats enough.

[Roady]

Re: Photomatch?

I noticed also that if you look at his left hand there seems to be a "slit" or "split" or whatever you want to call the separation of the stitching on his index finger. My glove has the split, not sure if thats enough.

Without a clear close up it would be hard to say.
I have tried to photomatch things before from my own collection and I found myself seeing what I wanted to see because I wanted it to match.

[MikeKam]

Re: Photomatch?

Yeah definitely. I can see some loose stitching that's featured on his left thumb and the sizes of each finger seem right but I may just be "wanting" to see that as you say. Same thing as when I started collecting autographs. First baseball I bought turned out to be a forgery but it took me a long time to finally admit that.

[ShaimOnYou]

Re: Photomatch?

A true photo match is a definitive visual display of evidence showing characteristics that prove an item is what it claims to be.

Although I don't see anything ruling out the possibility of a photo match, it's a stretch to say you have presented a photo match here.

That said, you very well may have the gloves worn in that photo. There just isn't enough detail to establish that fact, IMO.

Chris

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Re: Photomatch?

If you're trying to establish a photomatch based upon how the gloves were cut, you'd need the following:

1) High resolution version of the image from Getty.
2) A better depth of field on the focus for your camera.

A lot of the detail is simply blurred out in the pictures you've opted to share.

Part of the problem is using cutting & loose stitching along the cuts/seams as a basis for a match. Since this is something that can be somewhat replicated with a pair of scissors, I'm not sure the logic is the same that applies when comparing puckering of threads on a game used jersey.