Honus and his buddies...

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by Jaybird

There are many many images from this era where men are sitting on each others laps, holding each other close, etc. You'll see them when you type in "gay interest vintage photo" for an ebay search. It was a common practice and not at all indicative of familial relationship. You will see soldiers and men in studio settings holding hands, arms around each other and sitting on laps.

For what it's worth, that ain't Clarke.

Honus, may I sit on your lap?

[ksabet]

Just to let everyone know, the reverse of the photo in the OP also states similar names to the one Bobby has. I believe it says JA not EJA but then it has Wagner, Byrne, Miller and Cap as well.

So it seems we are certain that Wagner, Byrnes, Miller and Abatticchio are in there which leaves 3 unidentified for certain (Clarke is debatable apparently)

[bobbvc]

Originally Posted by ksabet

Just to let everyone know, the reverse of the photo in the OP also states similar names to the one Bobby has. I believe it says JA not EJA but then it has Wagner, Byrne, Miller and Cap as well.

So it seems we are certain that Wagner, Byrnes, Miller and Abatticchio are in there which leaves 3 unidentified for certain (Clarke is debatable apparently)

I think we all agree that the so called "Clarke" is at least the same guy in both photos, although he does seem to be about 4 or 5 beers deeper in your photo.

[Econteachert205]

I had definitely deluded myself quite proudly into thinking I had id'd the right person. I looked at the parts of the faces that matched and did not notice the parts which didn't . It was really helpful to look at the methods Marlowe shared in the article.

[bobbvc]

Originally Posted by ksabet

Just to let everyone know, the reverse of the photo in the OP also states similar names to the one Bobby has. I believe it says JA not EJA but then it has Wagner, Byrne, Miller and Cap as well.

So it seems we are certain that Wagner, Byrnes, Miller and Abatticchio are in there which leaves 3 unidentified for certain (Clarke is debatable apparently)

KS-Leaving current discussion aside, would love to see a back scan of your photo for personal reference.

[bmarlowe1]

See below.

[bobbvc]

Considering blurry photo, slight scale differences and 5-10 year time leap. Pretty close. Look at (his) left eye and how it comes to point vs. right eye. Can you chart that?

[ksabet]

Originally Posted by bobbvc

Considering blurry photo, slight scale differences and 5-10 year time leap. Pretty close. Look at (his) left eye and how it comes to point vs. right eye. Can you chart that?

Actually I think that scale might have done more to convince me it is Clarke than otherwise but it is really hard to tell.

Considering it is my photo that started it all I am just wondering if whether or not it is Clarke makes the photo any more valuable?

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by bobbvc

Considering blurry photo, slight scale differences and 5-10 year time leap. Pretty close. Look at (his) left eye and how it comes to point vs. right eye. Can you chart that?

On the lower (viewer's) right it's off by more than 1-1.5 inches when scaled up to life size - that's near the limit of human variability for an adult. You aren't likely to find a larger discrepancy between two different adult male humans. Can you imagine your jaw being an inch wider on one side? What it tells you is that they can't possibly be the same person.

10 Years for an adult can't account for that - jaw size is set by late teens. I can do the same comparison with later exemplars of Clarke and it comes out the same.

As for the eyes I have no idea what you are talking about.

[bmarlowe1]

I can do this with one Clarke frontal view after another - they will come up dead on. Why is your guy so far off? Here's Clarke in 1910 on the left.