?

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

Anyone recognize the background, uniforms, or weapons?

 

[Dan Kohli]

I'm fairly certain that the pistol was a 1851 Colt revolver. As for the other stuff, I'm not sure.

 

[7thWisconsin]

The man on the left is clearly wearing a Federal infantry frock, but it´s hard to tell about the guy on the right. There´s something odd about the background. Part of it looks like a painted background, but the house in the center looks oddly well-defined. Like we´re seeing a photograph of a photograph. The man on the right seems very awkward, too. He seems to have one hand inside his coat (which changes the definition enough that I can almost make out a cloth covered button in the center. It´s a frock, but it looks like he´s not wearing a vest under it. It must be a civilian coat, because he´s just plain too young to be a chaplain. The arm that´s linked in his pard´s seems awkward to me too. His resolution doesn´t look quite sharp enough for me to say his is a post mortem image, but something about him just doesn´t look right.
The parts aren´t adding up for me. Is it possible we´re looking at a pretty good fake?

 

[JackADriscoll]

This is super interesting. Do you think guy on right is deceased? I can see it

 

[19thGeorgia]

This is super interesting. Do you think guy on right is deceased? I can see it

Yes, he has sort of blank stare and the right hand appears limp.

Perhaps he is in his burial clothes.

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

The man on the left is clearly wearing a Federal infantry frock, but it´s hard to tell about the guy on the right. There´s something odd about the background. Part of it looks like a painted background, but the house in the center looks oddly well-defined. Like we´re seeing a photograph of a photograph. The man on the right seems very awkward, too. He seems to have one hand inside his coat (which changes the definition enough that I can almost make out a cloth covered button in the center. It´s a frock, but it looks like he´s not wearing a vest under it. It must be a civilian coat, because he´s just plain too young to be a chaplain. The arm that´s linked in his pard´s seems awkward to me too. His resolution doesn´t look quite sharp enough for me to say his is a post mortem image, but something about him just doesn´t look right.
The parts aren´t adding up for me. Is it possible we´re looking at a pretty good fake?

I don't think a fake. Passes magnet test and under a loupe there is no pixelation. In and out of focus foreshortening is consistent with both men. Guy on right is not post mortem. House is painted on the back drop.

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

This is super interesting. Do you think guy on right is deceased? I can see it

No

 

[dlofting]

No

You must have some information about this photo that you haven't posted that could be helpful in trying to answer your original question.

Could you post it?

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

You must have some information about this photo that you haven't posted that could be helpful in trying to answer your original question.

Could you post it?

I don't have any information on it.

 

[dlofting]

I don't have any information on it.

I was just wondering how you were sure (or sounded sure) that the house was painted on the background and it was not post mortem.

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

I was just wondering how you were sure (or sounded sure) that the house was painted on the background and it was not post mortem.

Ive seen a million photos from the time period.

 

[7thWisconsin]

Have you ever seen anyone else with that background? It clearly looks painted on the right, but almost photorealistic in the center, I´d like to see another example.

 

[Joe Whitworth]

After comparing a model 1849 and 1851 Navy in my average hand the pistol appears to be a model 1849 Colt with a 6 inch barrel and not a 1851 Navy unless the guy has really huge hands. Post mortem photos are really creepy. The guy on the left doesn't look too thrilled to be there and the poor soul on the right looks dead, perhaps his left hand and forearm arm are mangled or gone hence the pose.

 

[dlofting]

The position of the left hand of the man on the right looks odd. It's almost like he's wearing a modern jacket and has his hand in the pocket. It doesn't look like one of the myriad photos of the day where the subject was wearing a single or double breasted coat with his hand between the buttons.

 

[JackADriscoll]

It looks like some pictures of Victorian era funeral dress I've seen.

 

[7thWisconsin]

The eyes on the figure on the right, and the attitude of his head seem to argue against this being a post mortem image, but there´s still something unnatural about the position of his arms and hands that does suggest post mortem. Their faces and hair argue against it being a modern photo in an antique case, so I´m gonna go with that it´s original. There´s something postage stamp sized in the band of the right hand figure, too, but I can´t make it out. A badge or pin or motto or something like ¨In this style 10/6.¨ I´d still like to know more about the backdrop. That might give us a clue to where it was taken.
I´m 99% certain the revolver is a prop. So what we know for sure is an unidentified infantryman with his companion in front of a painted backdrop.
You didn´t try taking it out of the case to see if there´s anything behind it, did you?

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

The eyes on the figure on the right, and the attitude of his head seem to argue against this being a post mortem image, but there´s still something unnatural about the position of his arms and hands that does suggest post mortem. Their faces and hair argue against it being a modern photo in an antique case, so I´m gonna go with that it´s original. There´s something postage stamp sized in the band of the right hand figure, too, but I can´t make it out. A badge or pin or motto or something like ¨In this style 10/6.¨ I´d still like to know more about the backdrop. That might give us a clue to where it was taken.
I´m 99% certain the revolver is a prop. So what we know for sure is an unidentified infantryman with his companion in front of a painted backdrop.
You didn´t try taking it out of the case to see if there´s anything behind it, did you?

Nothing behind. There is no known contemporary account that weapons were ever photographer props.

 

[JackADriscoll]

Nothing behind. There is no known contemporary account that weapons were ever photographer props.

Are you sure?

 

[7thWisconsin]

Nothing behind. There is no known contemporary account that weapons were ever photographer props.

Stop. Just stop. Go back and look at your responses to other´s posts. They´re extremely short, dismissive... dare I even say curt. I don´t know anything about you, so it could be a language barrier thing or something else. But it´s starting to feel like you want to string us all along for some big reveal farther down the line. I would like to give you the benefit of doubt and continue to assume you´re not just a troll. So communication is a two-way street, yeah? Help us out a little here.
This statement is so outlandish as to be ridiculous. My wife´s family were 19th century photographers. We still have a house full of stuff that they used as props in photographs. There are thousands of images of soldiers wearing uniform items they were never issued, like sashes, and holding weapons their units never used, like swords, revolvers and even rifles. There´s an image of a 6th Wisconsin soldier in Lord´s Encyclopedia holding a Mississippi rifle. We know the 6th Wisconsin was not armed with these. Sometimes you´re even lucky enough to see a group of images taken by the same photographer with different men all holding the same props. So, let´s not pursue that any more. I think it´s safe to assume whenever you see a man in an image, that he may be holding a photographer´s prop.
There´s nothing to say that´s not his revolver, either. It might have been. Thousands of them were taken to war by enthusiastic volunteers. Later they were quietly sent home when the soldier realized that the weapon Uncle Sam gave him would do the job just fine. Or a commander ordered them turned in or sent home because of the danger to life and limb that they presented. That particular firearm would be next to useless for an infantryman. It has a range of roughly across the street. It´s too big to carry in your pocket, so it´s going to need a holster.
I think there´s something underneath the elbow of the arm with the pistol. It looks dark and shiny. Chair arm, maybe?

 

[JackADriscoll]

Stop. Just stop. Go back and look at your responses to other´s posts. They´re extremely short, dismissive... dare I even say curt. I don´t know anything about you, so it could be a language barrier thing or something else. But it´s starting to feel like you want to string us all along for some big reveal farther down the line. I would like to give you the benefit of doubt and continue to assume you´re not just a troll. So communication is a two-way street, yeah? Help us out a little here.
This statement is so outlandish as to be ridiculous. My wife´s family were 19th century photographers. We still have a house full of stuff that they used as props in photographs. There are thousands of images of soldiers wearing uniform items they were never issued, like sashes, and holding weapons their units never used, like swords, revolvers and even rifles. There´s an image of a 6th Wisconsin soldier in Lord´s Encyclopedia holding a Mississippi rifle. We know the 6th Wisconsin was not armed with these. Sometimes you´re even lucky enough to see a group of images taken by the same photographer with different men all holding the same props. So, let´s not pursue that any more. I think it´s safe to assume whenever you see a man in an image, that he may be holding a photographer´s prop.
There´s nothing to say that´s not his revolver, either. It might have been. Thousands of them were taken to war by enthusiastic volunteers. Later they were quietly sent home when the soldier realized that the weapon Uncle Sam gave him would do the job just fine. Or a commander ordered them turned in or sent home because of the danger to life and limb that they presented. That particular firearm would be next to useless for an infantryman. It has a range of roughly across the street. It´s too big to carry in your pocket, so it´s going to need a holster.
I think there´s something underneath the elbow of the arm with the pistol. It looks dark and shiny. Chair arm, maybe?

Primer: Civil War Union and Confederate camp photographers

How Civil War camp photographers got started, details of the studies and prop weapons, and other information about Union and Confederate photographers.

www.militaryimagesmagazine-digital.com