![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Where did the original poster go? I'd be interested in learning where he obtained the photo.
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's a man with a thick beard in a setting that has nothing to do with Chadwick's work as a sportswriter; it has a dubious identification which consists of a pencil notation identifying the man as Chadwick; and I am not convinced it is him.
This kind of spurious photo identification is not enough for me. My opinion is it is not Henry Chadwick. Last edited by barrysloate; 05-07-2009 at 09:02 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
One other point to consider is the men in the background have the kind of mustaches that were fashionable in the 1885-1890 era, which looks to be roughly the date of the tintype. At that time Henry Chadwick was pushing 65. I don't believe the man with the beard is much older than his forties.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In 20+ years of antique collecting, I have never seen a vintage tintype with vintage writing on the front of it. People would not obstruct something as valuable as a photo like that. These would come from the photographer in a paper slip frame at least which would allow for writing around the paper border or on the reverse. Had this been in a hard gutta-percha case or something like that, people usually just glued or jammed a paper slip in the case with an ID. This is why there are so many tintypes with no chance ever of being identified but a large number of CDV's have identifications. There is no chance in my opinion that the pencil writing was done before WW2. As one other observation, had someone actually taken the time to identify this photo, they would have identified all the guys, not just the famous one.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Side by side comparison.
Are there any facial features that indicate they are different people? I'm no expert but they look the same to me. Chadwick from NYPL.jpg maybe Chadwick.jpg |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Orator1 - I think you have it backwards. While I agree that there is nothing in the tintype in the blurry compressed format as posted here that can absolutely eliminate that guy from being Chadwick - the point is, with what is posted here, one cannot conclude that it is Chadwick. The image lacks sufficent detail for an identification.
![]() Last edited by bmarlowe1; 05-07-2009 at 11:12 AM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If this guy is not looking at himself in the picture below, than I am going crazy! Barry, in the NYPL picture that was posted there are three guys with very similar moustaches. Also, Henry Chadwick did like to fish. Also, similar hats and clothing.
Ok, I do not know if its him or not, but I think its interesting how this thread goes on to point out the negs and thats it. ![]() Henry in Prison ![]() ![]() |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
smokelessjoe -
quoting a disinguished board member from a prior thread: "There's a RESEMBLANCE. But without more, it should die there. Resemblances alone almost always lead to nowhere." The reason we are being "negative" is in an effort to counter the large lack of critical thinking that causes people to bid big $ on photos like this. First of all you are comparing a fuzzy image to another fuzzy image - pretty worthless. BTW - if you compare the nose to a clear Chadwick semi-profile image - it doesn't seem quite right. But again - the tintype is too fuzzy to be sure about anything. Last edited by bmarlowe1; 05-07-2009 at 01:01 PM. Reason: spelling |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Mark,
I am well aware of the reasons to be negative in ones approach at comparing something in question. Obviously there are reasons for looking at similarities as well, I was just pointing out a (what I think) lack there of in that category. A balanced approach from both sides of the coin is what is fair. First of all, we all are comparing fuzzy images to the like. That is all we have at this point, so that is all we CAN compare. A question was posed and I as well as many others have replied. I see more than just a resemblance including the noses... Again, in my opinion someone is going to buy something whether we criticize it or praise it, and if you do not do your research and find a comfort zone with your purchase then you are at fault. I for one would not buy this tin-type with the thinking that anyone in the picture is a known person. As others have said, there is not enough info. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Henry Chadwick did have a house on Long Island in Noyac (I too have a house in Noyac) which was near Little Trout Pond, so he may indeed have liked to fish. But as Mark said the picture is tiny and his face is entirely covered by a beard. Similarities with Chadwick for sure, but no way you can simply say it is him. Provenance would be very important here.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wow I posted this last week and never checked back. I never dreamed that anyone would question this being Chadwick. I was just looking to see if there were other persons of interest in the photo. The photo is in fact Henry Chadwick. Provenance:The photo came to the market directly from his great grandaughter. If she is agreeable, I'll post her comments as I am in contact with her regularly. She got a kick out of anyone questioning that it was Henry. Some of you don't need to quit your day jobs to go into photo identification!
![]() |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was simply mentioning what you confirmed, that the notation was done later down the line as I have never seen a period notation on the front of a tintype. It is a really cool photo.
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
nyyanksghr --
>> Henry's granddaughter is believed to be the one who wrote his name on the photo Why would she do that? I would never write my grandfather's name on a vintage family photo since we all know who he is. If I was concerned about the next generation knowing who he was, I would write it on the back. If he was famous and I wanted to perhaps sell it, I would not spoil the photo by writing his name on the front, especially if I expected no question as to his identity. >> The photo came to the market directly from his great grandaughter. What do you mean by "came to market"? when? was there an auction? Last edited by bmarlowe1; 05-13-2009 at 09:25 PM. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I understand your point and agree that you or I would never do this, but given all of the cards and photos we have seen over the years, wouldn't you agree that many people have done things to items that you or I wouldn't do. I don't think that just because we wouldn't do something, or it doesn't make sense, doesn't mean that the item isn't authentic. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The photo was sold by his greatgrandaughter to the individual I obtained it from. She kept a photo copy of the photo for the family. She confrmed that she indeed sold it to the collector I purchased it from and even identified her mothers handwriting on the photo. I have the largest collection of sports photography in private hands...2.4 million images. I have hundereds of vintage photos that are identified right on the front. Its not common but certainly happens. Chadwicks granddaughter, who passed in 1978 wrote on most of the Chadwick items. n the 60's or 70's, this photo had no value.She would simply write "Henry Chadwick" or "H. Chadwick" on many items, cabinets, letters, scrapbooks, etc. Wy she did this? So generations in the future would know who he was.
Last edited by nyyanksghr; 05-13-2009 at 09:40 PM. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
When did we move from ears to noses? Very interesting discussion, conclusively inconclusive.
|
![]() |
|
|