Dirty Laundry Game Worn Forums

Hi @everyone,

I was hoping to hear from everyone on what they think constitutes a proper photo match. In recent times I have seen some (including "dealers") describe a match as a loose thread. As someone who has proven that a loose thread on one jersey does not mean a similar thread could not be another a jersey, I think there needs to be a standard that we go by.

For me and a plethora of others, a photo match should be: 3 distinct marks, repairs, and/or areas that match up in a photo and on the sweater. Certain circumstances can be made for a truly unique mark, repair, or game use that could not be duplicated, but I think the industry standard is three unique marks or game use. To my knowledge this is what MeiGray uses and I would welcome a debate about this. My goal is not to bash anyone for what they think is a match, but to discuss it, have a clear conscious about constitutes a photo match, and raise the bar/standard for all so that when a match is made we can all agree what we see is a match. I think the higher we raise the bar for what we expect, the better our hobby becomes...

So let's debate away. What do you think makes a photo match?

I think a loose thread is legit, especially if there are several (usually are) and is present on more than one photo. Obviously, prefer to have more than threads, but on jerseys such as a winter classic one period wonder or other recent shirts that are worn for only a game or two… have to deal with what you have. Have a 06 Garth Brooks one period shirt and have a loose thread present on several photos… one game shirt with no other visible wear, so that’s as good as it gets and with multiple photos, works for me as a legit match.

Sulli,
Had a "dealer" tell me that this ONE getty photo (just one!) was a photomatch to a regular season jersey with a lone loose thread. That was a tough pill to swallow as I never saw the thread anywhere else. However, I respect and get what you are saying with the one period/game wonders and having to literally nickel and dime for anything to match it to: "Oh look how the stitching on the nameplate isn't exactly straight here across the back... MATCH!" I just think there has to be more than a loose thread for a newer jersey especially in the Getty age of 2005- and up even if it is black, white, or navy blue jersey... c'mon folks what are we doing here??? I am okay if there isn't a match, but claiming one thread and not being able to hear "the Count" from Sesame street say, "One Loose thread... TWO loose threads... Three loose threads... Ah Ah Ah..." is painful because it's a might be a match versus conclusive. Sorry, I know you just got the "The Count's voice" stuck in your head... My bad.

Best case: 2 or 3 large, unique marks on the jersey that show on several pictures. That usually does the job for me.

However, I fooled myself recently with that, too. At first glance, a jersey i bought had been worn the entire season (was marked as set 1 as well): The shoulder showed some distinct holes and marks that could be seen in almost every pic from that year, including the playoffs.
Later, I realized that the player actually managed to put almost the exact same wear on his playoff set - the one I ultimately wound up with. How did I find out? The regular season jersey had the "A" removed and mine doesn't show any signs of that. And part of the wear on mine was about 1 inch to the left compared to the spot in the pictures from the regular season jersey. But it perfectly matches the playoff pictures. Still, a few marks should be enough most of the time.

I'm a bit on the fence regarding loose threads. Yes, sometimes a thread is so specifically shaped that it can be matched conclusively, especially when it's a more recent jersey with high-resolution pictures. But with jerseys from the pre-HD age, matching loose threads on pictures often becomes more of a question of belief - is it a match or do I want it to be one? Only surpassed by matching loose threads or minor stains to 35 year old video tapes. Sometimes that pixel might be what you're looking for - but often it's just a pixel and you'll never know.