photomatch question

[kellsox]

I realize that photomatching a game used item is a great way to put a jersey on a player's back or a bat in their hands but I have always questioned the weight that collectors put into a photomatched item. Is a stray mark on a bat or jersey enough to qualify an item as photomatched? How hard would it be for a party to apply use to an item based on pictures found on the web?
Kelly

[Swoboda4]

It would be a interesting challenge. Difficult but not impossible. Marking the jersey to match a photograph would not be the hard part. The most difficult part would be to get a jersey or bat with the correct original markings or layoutas the photo,(grain,pinstriping,etc)prior to doctoring. How about a challenge? The best made fake jersey to match any photo on the web?

[kingjammy24]

"Is a stray mark on a bat or jersey enough to qualify an item as photomatched?"

it depends on the particular mark but often times, i'd say yes.
it's not simply "a mark". it's a very specifically shaped mark with its own unique set of grooves, indents, etc. like a snowflake. are any 2 marks identical? i don't believe they are and as such, this uniqueness hits to the heart of photomatching. ultimately, i don't believe that even a rock solid photomatch leaves absolutely no doubt simply because of the miniscule possibility that it's technically possible for 2 marks to be the same. however, it's statistically improbable. this statistical improbability makes a solid photomatch overwhelmingly likely that the 2 items in question are the same. it's a little like dna testing. people trust it absolutely right? well it's never 100%. the most conclusive it gets is something like 99.99%. statistically though, that's enough to say that something is overwhelmingly likely.

"How hard would it be for a party to apply use to an item based on pictures found on the web?"

depends on the specific use. i'd think a broken thread would be very easy. all you'd need to do is find the exact thread and cut it. however, specific marks (rack marks, pine tar, ball marks, helmet marks, etc) would be almost impossible because each mark has a unique shape. if i showed you a photo of an game used bat, how would you possibly duplicate the pine tar so it'd be a perfect photomatch? you'd have to duplicate every single ridge, indent, bump, etc in every single millimeter of it. it'd be like trying to perfectly duplicate the brushstrokes in a painting. if the jersey has a stain or tear, how would you possibly get the exact shape of that stain or tear down the point where it's identical millimeter-by-millimeter? i'd wager that if you dipped a paintbrush in paint and did 100 separate brushstrokes, you wouldn't be able to make any of them truly identical. each one would have something unique to differentiate it.

rudy.

[jon_8_us]

"Is a stray mark on a bat or jersey enough to qualify an item as photomatched?"

it depends on the particular mark but often times, i'd say yes.
it's not simply "a mark". it's a very specifically shaped mark with its own unique set of grooves, indents, etc. like a snowflake. are any 2 marks identical? i don't believe they are and as such, this uniqueness hits to the heart of photomatching. ultimately, i don't believe that even a rock solid photomatch leaves absolutely no doubt simply because of the miniscule possibility that it's technically possible for 2 marks to be the same. however, it's statistically improbable. this statistical improbability makes a solid photomatch overwhelmingly likely that the 2 items in question are the same. it's a little like dna testing. people trust it absolutely right? well it's never 100%. the most conclusive it gets is something like 99.99%. statistically though, that's enough to say that something is overwhelmingly likely.

"How hard would it be for a party to apply use to an item based on pictures found on the web?"

depends on the specific use. i'd think a broken thread would be very easy. all you'd need to do is find the exact thread and cut it. however, specific marks (rack marks, pine tar, ball marks, helmet marks, etc) would be almost impossible because each mark has a unique shape. if i showed you a photo of an game used bat, how would you possibly duplicate the pine tar so it'd be a perfect photomatch? you'd have to duplicate every single ridge, indent, bump, etc in every single millimeter of it. it'd be like trying to perfectly duplicate the brushstrokes in a painting. if the jersey has a stain or tear, how would you possibly get the exact shape of that stain or tear down the point where it's identical millimeter-by-millimeter? i'd wager that if you dipped a paintbrush in paint and did 100 separate brushstrokes, you wouldn't be able to make any of them truly identical. each one would have something unique to differentiate it.

rudy.

I will use a example that Rudy actually helped me out with to explain what he is talking about.Here is my Gary sheffield photomatched Hr bat that Rudy made the pics for.Notice the moon shaped ball mark.Almost impossible to replicate: