Sandman Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I just uploaded 1948 and 1961 versions of the Cleveland Indians and Detroit Tiger Uniforms. The 1961 Uniforms are new and the 1948 are updates from last year. Enjoy! Sandy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 The Indians uniforms look great, but I think you made your wordmarks too big. The Tigers uniforms have the following inaccuracies: --Cap logo should be orange for the home uniforms --Incorrect wordmark on the away uniforms (should be cursive script Detroit wordmark instead of 1961-71 style you're showing) --Socks should have two orange stripes (both uniforms) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I disagree with you Moser316 on the logo color, the cursive writing and the stripes. Basically I disagree with everything you stated above. I think you are speaking of the '48 version which isn't even shown above. Plus even if it was the '48 version there are 3 organge stripes not 2 on them ---- but who the hell is counting ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I assumed from the text he was showing the 1961 Indians and the 1948 Tigers, hence my critiques. Even still, if he's showing the 1961 version of the Tigers uniforms, there's still one glaring mistake: they didn't wear piping on their away uniforms. Side note: for a project that's supposed to represent the history of baseball (both visually and in terms of gameplay), I just don't see the slavish attention to detail in some parts of the project. This is not an indictment of anybody in particular, it's more of a blanket statement and a challenge to everybody involved to make this thing as close to perfect as possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Then I highly suggest you don't use them with that glaring mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 You people don't take constructive criticism very well, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 We sincerely appreciate constructive criticism. But I have noticed you have provided criticism on each uniform this gentleman has uploaded lately and I have yet to see where you have been correct on any of it. Words like "glaring" aren't exactly a good choice in a constructive critique ---- then when one critiques he should occasionally be correct to maintain his creditability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I don't have to prove myself for MVP, have you heard of my "Kickin' It Old School" project for High Heat 2004? Basically, I did every single uniform variation from 1940-present. I used many resources extensively for the project, including Marc Okkonen's bible (which I use as my source for any critiques) and the color information sheets at the Society for Sports Uniform Research's website (www.ssur.org). I've offered sources for this guy to get the correct information, both on colors and on uniform designs. What's wrong with providing criticism where something is done inaccurately? Isn't that the point of the whole thing? You're getting way too sensitive about this, especially since none of the critiques apply to anything you've done. Why don't you just stay out of this, and let this guy take my critiques into consideration (or not, it's entirely up to him)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Sensitive maybe but I don't think it is I. No, you don't have to prove yourself and I don't recall anyone asking you to either. No, I never heard of your "Kickin' It Old School" from High Heat. But I do applaud those efforts as they sound extremely detailed and I probably would have really admired them. I just personally didn't like your quick inaccurate critques and particularly the tone I read in them. Thus, I decided to share my opinion with you as you shared with Sandman. And I am so unsensitve to your statements that I am now beginning to chuckle a bit regarding this whole discussion as I hope you are as well. I would suggest that you reread your crtiques slowly before posting, not merely for accurracy (which certainly mistakes happen like thinking those were '48 uniforms versus '61 - which by the way I knew that's what you had done before I responded) and most importantly try and offer a reasonable degree of supportive words first off then announce your opinions. Finally, attempt to be very sensitive on what words you choose in your critique. Believe me, I know Sandman and he does appreciate your comments and he takes them to heart. You are the first person I have challenged here since I joined MVPMods over a year ago - so I think that might have some merit as to your choice of words which set the tone of your post were a bit rough. And the purpose of Total Classic is not for anyone to provide "Slavish" attention to detail to anything - no one should expect that - some do more than others but no one should expect it from any one on this or any other project. This is a game which some of us take much more seriously than others but in the end, regardless of our passion for it, it is only a game. Let me close and state that I do admire your passion for the details of Oldtime Baseball as I think I share that with you. If we all support and make each other feel we are doing something right we will all get closer to the level of detail both you and I seek. Take Care, Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbasalmon Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Um, according to the Dressed by the Nines website at the Baseball Hall of Fame's website, which I'm assuming is the same, or at least close to Okkonen's book, the Tigers had white D's on their hats for both home and away. If you don't believe me, peep http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/exhibits...amp;Entryid=975 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Sensitive maybe but I don't think it is I. No, you don't have to prove yourself and I don't recall anyone asking you to either. No, I never heard of your "Kickin' It Old School" from High Heat. But I do applaud those efforts as they sound extremely detailed and I probably would have really admired them. I just personally didn't like your quick inaccurate critques and particularly the tone I read in them. Thus, I decided to share my opinion with you as you shared with Sandman. And I am so unsensitve to your statements that I am now beginning to chuckle a bit regarding this whole discussion as I hope you are as well. I would suggest that you reread your crtiques slowly before posting, not merely for accurracy (which certainly mistakes happen like thinking those were '48 uniforms versus '61 - which by the way I knew that's what you had done before I responded) and most importantly try and offer a reasonable degree of supportive words first off then announce your opinions. Finally, attempt to be very sensitive on what words you choose in your critique. Believe me, I know Sandman and he does appreciate your comments and he takes them to heart. You are the first person I have challenged here since I joined MVPMods over a year ago - so I think that might have some merit as to your choice of words which set the tone of your post were a bit rough. And the purpose of Total Classic is not for anyone to provide "Slavish" attention to detail to anything - no one should expect that - some do more than others but no one should expect it from any one on this or any other project. This is a game which some of us take much more seriously than others but in the end, regardless of our passion for it, it is only a game. Let me close and state that I do admire your passion for the details of Oldtime Baseball as I think I share that with you. If we all support and make each other feel we are doing something right we will all get closer to the level of detail both you and I seek. Take Care, Don I was looking in Okkonen's book when I made the critiques for both uniforms. According to the heading, I thought he was showing the 1948 Tigers when I made that critique on his uniforms (I didn't realize he was showing the 1961 version for both uniforms, that was my mistake). Please realize that it was a misunderstanding, that I clarified my critique earlier in the thread, and that I moved on from there. If my words were a bit rough, I apologize if they were taken the wrong way, but I am not changing them for this or any future critiques I may have. I ask you (and any others who may be taken aback by my style) to consider the source and address any critiques according as you see (or don't see) fit. I stand by my information and use it extensively when I do my uniforms or make critiques. I jumped the gun for the date on this one, but rest assured that it was due to a misunderstanding about the heading of the post not totally agreeing with what was presented. You still haven't told me what your resources are, Don (since I assume we're now on a first-name basis here). Please do me a favor and indulge me this request. --James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The H Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Guys, take it easy... please. Stecropper, Mr. Moser here is quite an authority in the art of uniform making and he always makes sure the details on each set are as close to the real thing as possible (believe me, I've dealt with Moser quite a bit, especially with myself being as nit picky as they come when the subject involves my beloved Cincinnati Reds). He (as I did too) got confused with how these sets were presented on Sandman's post. He noticed his mishap and apologize for it. End of story. Moser, Stecropper, from what I've learned reading through his many posts here (and from other different boards in the past), is what I consider a real connoisseur of everything related to 'old time' baseball. I'm sure he's just trying to make a valid point in regards of some of your postings. Sometimes (and I mean, sometimes) your (Moser's) comments come out a little bit on the harsh/rude side of things, but I know it isn't intentionally but instead, a mere attempt to just make things as clear as possible whenever you detect an error here or there on some uniform sets. It's all good, but please, don't become a guy like JDK or even Yammer, hehehe (enough with the 'attitude' of those two). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandman Posted April 21, 2005 Author Share Posted April 21, 2005 I'm the first one to admit my uniforms are not perfect. I think my problem is I've tried to make too many uniforms rather than spend time on details as Moser suggest. Since your critcisms began. I've tried to pay more attention to detail but many of these uniforms were completed already. I believe the uniforms on "Dressed for the Nines" are not perfect especially when it comes to color. I just worked on the 1960 Senators for example and the colors shown are a lighter blue. All photos and other resouces I've seen the color is more of a navy blue. The 1960s Senators uniform which exist already in MVP 2005 shows the script as the lighter blue and doesn't look anything at all like the photos I've seen. I don't think teams always used their exact team colors on their uniforms. My point is sometimes it's tough to decide which color is right. I do respect your opinion Moser as I've seen the great work you have done with your uniforms. Even though my uniforms are not always historically accurate, I believe they give the feel of "Classic Baseball". Sandy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
five Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Is this the bible you refer to? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...836602?v=glance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Is this the bible you refer to? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...836602?v=glance Yup, I have one of the later editions of the book (his first one covered up through 1990-91, and mine covers through 1994)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Moser, Be glad to share some of my resources with you and they range from historical DVDs to Books to On line. And I do once again wish to state that I fully admire your attention to detail. It is quite obvious that you are very highly regarded by many as a truly knowledgeable person when it comes to Oldtime Baseball uniforms. Some of the video DVDs that I have and watch frequently (mostly for pure enjoyment) but often to get a better feeling for players batting stances, pitching deliveries and even body & facial features that I may not recall too vividly in my mind (since I did follow baseball quite seriously and with a true passion since the early '50s) are: 1) The 10 Volume PBS Home Video set "Baseball - A Film by Ken Burns" 2) The 3 Pak set "The National Pastime - Baseball" 3) From Rare Sportsfilms, Inc "Summer of 1957" includes game reels and interviews 4) From Rare Sportsfilms, Inc "Summer of 1958" includes game reels and interviews 5) From Rare Sportsfilms, Inc "1960 World Series" includes game reels and interviews 6) From Rare Sportsfilms, Inc "1961 World Series" includes game reels and interviews 7) Vintage World Series Films sponsored by MLB "1959, 63 & 65 World Series" Dodgers Vintage World Series Films sponsored by MLB "1964, 67 & 68 World Series" Cardinals 9) Vintage World Series Films sponsored by MLB "1961 World Series" Reds 10) MLB productions 100 Years of World Series - 2 volume set 11) Highway 61 Productions "Long Gone" Connie Mack Stadium & the '64 Phillies Some of the books are: 1) The Complete Picture Collection "A 35 History - 1951-1985" Topps Baseball Cards 2) The Neyer/James Guide to Pitchers 3) The Sports Encylopedia "Baseball 1997" Version by David Neft & Richard Cohen 4) "Total Baseball" by John Thorn & Pete Palmer 5) The Baseball Encyclopedia; The Complete and Definitive Record of Major League Baseball by MacMillan 6) Baseball Desk Reference by Lorimer 7) The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract Baseball Extra - A Newspaper History of the Glorious Game From its Beginning to the Present 9) Although not a book it is a DVD reference: The Baseball Encyclopedia; MacMillan Digital's Then there is the online stuff we all use plus I have over 40 DVD baseball movies and numerous other baseball autobiographies type books and general baseball reference type books type as well. Hope this helps and keep in touch. I think we both have a passion for much the same stuff. Take Care, Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moser316 Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Thanks for the info, and I apologize if we got off on the wrong foot. My personality is definitely an acquired taste :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I should also offer you my "Full" apology. I am very much a tremendous fan of Sandman's uniforms. I just noticed your critiques on each of his recent uploads offered very little to no show of appreciation for his work and I honestly have to say it perturbed me probably more so than I should have let it. Then I decided to retaliate by pointing out your inaccuratcies even though I fully knew you had gotten confused on the actual year in the photos. That was less than upright of me to do - and I am willing to admit it. My pride of self control and compassion wasn't represented well on this one! I guess it shows even us who consider ourselves near perfectionist aren't as near as we would like to think! Otherwise the facts are even in the early '60s teams wore more than just their primary home and away uniforms sets. Man, I think the KC A's had like 5-6 varieties of uniforms in like '63 or so ........... so variety in this case is probably OK for most of us. I am truly one that seldom challenges anyone's opinion because I have come to learn that opinions are opinions. Your background certainly warrants you offering your opinions on uniforms and I understand why they are very much welcomed by many. I look forward to reading more of your critiques as I find they provide a great insight into Oldtime Baseball. Take Care James and let's get as close to what we seek as we can !!! Actually - I am very happy with where we are with MVP 2005 as it far surpasses where I ever thought we would be. Enjoy it All, Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.