A little venting

[major bill]

Another "uniform' expert was kind to me but though my research about another regiment was unconvincing. He saw a photograph 25 years ago of this regiment before they left the state and they were wearing blue uniforms. My research came up with 7 newspaper articles in 5 different newspapers that say they were issued gray uniforms. I also found 2 letters written by the men in the regiment who claim they were issued gray uniforms as well as 2 journal entries that say they received gray uniforms.

He says he saw what he saw and all my gray uniform information was people being mistaken. I find it hard to believe that 4 people who received blue uniforms could be mistaken about receiving gray uniforms. In general 11 accounts of gray uniforms and zero accounts of blue uniforms give me pause to believe a photograph seen 25 years ago especially considering he does not remember where he saw the photograph.

I am going to contact a couple of people who wrote books on this regiment and see if they lean towards blue or gray uniforms being issued. But for the time being I am leaning towards gray uniforms.

I am not saying they were wrong, but both uniform experts seem to have based their opinions on what I would call some what limited research. Today makes me wounder about re-enactors who claim to be uniform experts. I plan on reviewing any old uniform information I have gathered from re-enactors and evaluated it.

 

[Waterloo50]

I went to a re-enactment today and now I am venting over the "uniform' experts there. I am not a re-enactor, but study military uniforms. After talking to a couple of "uniform" experts I have to wonder about what is considered proper research. I will give one example. I was studying a Civil War era militia uniform photogrpah and discovered some one else was researching the same unit. I sent them some of my research and asked if they had found anything different. Today I had an opertunity to talk to the individual and found out just how stupid I am and how poor my research is.

We both seen the same photograph and he decided the image showed a gray uniform with black trim. After viewing the photograph I went through 5 years of 25 local newspapers to see if anything was written about the company. I found two articles that say the uniforms were gray with red trim. I went back twice more and look at the image to see if I thought the trim was red or black. At this point I am going with red trim but am still open to other views.

The other gentleman told me I had wasted my time doing the newspaper work and he could tell right away the trim was black in the photogrpah and did not need to do any additional research and he is going ahead and make a reproduction uniform with black trim. I made the mistake of asking him what was the odds of both newspapers being mistaken about the red trim. He became rather upset and let me know that in 1860 newspaper reporters lack intelligent and probably could not tell red trim from black trim. He then let me know my research methods were completely worn and in general he found me to have a lack of ability and he also questioned my intelligence. I wished him well on making the reproduction uniform.

Should I have really skipped the newspaper research and went with a first impression of the image? I may forgo discussing uniform information with re-enactors in the future.

Hi,

I think that you should continue with your own method of research. In my opinion some of the best historians are the ones who refer to original documents, letters and newspaper articles. I think one of the mistakes that historians continuously make is that they rely on previously published work which is often full of mistakes, so we end up with the same mistakes being repeated time and time again. I can think of numerous books that I have read where the facts have been distorted. I admire anyone that takes the time and effort to carry out their own research. The gentleman that questioned your 'lack of ability' and 'intelligence', clearly didn't like his so called 'expertise' called into question. IMHO I think that you should continue with your research, history will always need free thinkers and people that are prepared to challenge long held beliefs. Don't give up on your interest and remember that most re-enactors are keen to get their uniforms as accurate as possible. My bet is that the next re-enactor that you talk to will be keen to hear what you have to say. Who knows, one day you may even have enough information to write a book on the subject.

Good Luck

Waterloo

 

[Waterloo50]

major bill,

Have you ever thought about adding colour to some of your old photos, there are plenty of links on the Web on the different types of computer programmes that you could use, photoshop for example have a method for doing this. I'm thinking that adding colour would help with your argument, e.g. it would have helped in the situation with the re-enactor Black v Red.....sometimes, if it looks right, it is right. Just a thought.

Here is a link for adding colour to vintage photographs

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/4206...k-and-white-vintage-photographs-in-photoshop/


Waterloo

 

[James B White]

The problem is that the color of an original object can't be derived from a black and white photograph. The information simply isn't contained in it. A dark-looking cuff might be red, but it might be brown or dark gray and there is literally no way to tell.

A colorized photo would indeed look very cool, but it would only be a modern individual's interpretation. I do agree with you that Major Bill is doing research right by comparing a variety of sources. I'm surprised how many reenactors have never accepted the basic concept of providing evidence and defending their conclusions, and get all huffy the first time they're introduced to it, as if it's a personal afront rather than the standard way historians discuss research.

 

[Frito]

Well, at least he didn't go berserk about the type of buttons you have on your jacket, bless his heart!

Hey you changed your avatar, when I first saw it I was like " Who the heck is that OLD GREEZER " LOL sorry Bro had to say that. Oh by the by Happy Belated Birthday Ya OLD FOSSIL. HEHEHE

 

[FarawayFriend]

One or two individuals can dominate even if they don't hold some official office.

Amen to that. In my working group of about 24 people we have two of these. Usually mobbing is when an individual is ostracized by a group . In our case it is the other way round, two people are mobbing 22 others. Holding back infos, stopping to talk if anyone enters the room etc., exchanging catty remarks about a third person so that the third person has to hear them... and of course getting nowhere with that. It could be laughable if it wasn't so annoying. I wait for the day when I will no longer care about it. I have another 12 years to go at work, maybe the day will still come!

 

[major bill]

I alway at least try to look for period news paper account or letters home or such. My issue of looking at a photograph only, is that too many photographs are misidentified. Also the day, month and year a photograph was taken is often in doubt. I have been in arcieves and libraries where an image is listed as a Civil War image and the image is clearly post Civil War. For example the rifle held in the photo is a post war rifle.

 

[Waterloo50]

The problem is that the color of an original object can't be derived from a black and white photograph. The information simply isn't contained in it. A dark-looking cuff might be red, but it might be brown or dark gray and there is literally no way to tell.

A colorized photo would indeed look very cool, but it would only be a modern individual's interpretation. I do agree with you that Major Bill is doing research right by comparing a variety of sources. I'm surprised how many reenactors have never accepted the basic concept of providing evidence and defending their conclusions, and get all huffy the first time they're introduced to it, as if it's a personal afront rather than the standard way historians discuss research.

Hi James B White,

Your absolutely right about the difficulty in interpreting colour/color in old photographs but I think that the point that I was really making was that sometimes adding colour to a photograph can help with an interpretation, especially if it is backed up with eye witness reports and descriptions of said uniform. It could perhaps be the case that colour is added to a photograph and the uniform in the photograph just doesn't look correct and so the conclusion could be reached that it is indeed the wrong colour but as you say, 'A colorized photo would indeed look very cool.

I have seen plenty of colorized footage from WW1 and it has worked incredibly well, the difference is that the researchers of WW1 have clear evidence of the colour of uniforms for that period, they struggle however with the complex paint schemes on WW1 aircraft. There doesn't appear to be a reliable method for interpreting colour from old photographs without decent eyewitness reports and plenty of in-depth research.


I have a book of ACW paintings by Don Troiani, he has gathered his knowledge of uniforms from obscure photographs and drawings as well as letters and diary accounts and as a result his work stands up to close scrutiny, and that is exactly what major bill is doing, 'plenty of research' and long may he continue. It was quite wrong of the re-enactor to take offence, he should have been open to discussion on the subject or at least been a little more eloquent in his response.

Perhaps it would be interesting to look at some recently coloured photographs of the ACW, it would certainly create a lot of debate.

Regards

Waterloo

 

[major bill]

A colorized photograph would be great, but I have a question. Say the arcieves gives me permission to use the photograph and I pay for the use and such. Does this give me the right to add color to the image? Would I have to receive permission in writing to change the image, ie.add color? The permission letters I have received do not contain any reference to changing the image. How ever changing the image in a way that effects the value of the image could be an issue for the owner of the image. I would believe this would be more of aproblem with privately owned images.

 

[Waterloo50]

Hi major bill,

I really wouldn't know where you would stand on copyright, but if you scan and upload an image you would only be altering a copy not the original. I'm sure that owners wouldn't mind an electronic copy being altered providing that it was for your own private use and that you acknowledged the ownership of the image. When you talk about the value of the image are you meaning the historic value? There are thousands of ACW images on the internet which are available to the general public, if you use these images and alter them, you may only have to make an acknowledgement that you do not own the original copy and state clearly who does own it. I'm sure someone on the forum will know the answer.
Article I, Section 8, clause 8, of the United States Constitution states the purpose of copyright laws is "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

Here is a link on fair Use and copyright for online images and photographs..

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/copyright-fair-use-and-how-it-works-for-online-images/

Regards

Waterloo

 

[Allie]

It shouldn't ordinarily be an issue, as photos taken that long ago are public domain. Although archives like to claim otherwise, legally, "slavish" reproductions of artworks in the public domain ( in other words, simple reproductions which do not add to the work artistically) are not copyrightable under US law.

This article has a long discussion with a legal expert on this subject.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernard-starr/museum-paintings-copyright_b_1867076.html

 

[frankconrad]

The odds are probably at least 3 to one that the one who knows it all is at leas 20 years to young to have did all that he has done.

 

[rbasin]

Stop speaking to him. There must be other people you can ask. I'll bet he doesn't know as much as he would let people believe.

 

[peteanddelmar]

Group solidarity and following group tradition often is stronger than wanting to follow history or become more accurate, so someone who brings forth new information or challenges (asks questions about) the old may not be received well. Challenging old research may be as simple as asking "what's your evidence?" If the unit guru can't produce it, his status is called into question and it's a personal attack. Seen it happen many times.

Where's your evidence for that? LOL.

 

[peteanddelmar]

. It could be laughable if it wasn't so annoying.

The odds are probably at least 3 to one that the one who knows it all is at leas 20 years to young to have did all that he has done.

He says he saw what he saw and all my gray uniform information was people being mistaken.

You folks are patient!
I don't play that well with others!
Mostly I was self employed or in outdoor sales in my work career.
I could give details about the different ways I have told bosses what I thought or refused to play office politics, but it would be boring and not be the type of Christian witness I would like to leave. (Yes, I have not lived up to the standards I believe in at times!) As a self employed person I used well written duplicate contracts to keep the air clear.
What you describe Major bill would drive me insane!

Would you believe that when I was young I had a temper?

 

[FarawayFriend]

Would you believe that when I was young I had a temper?

As you have not ceased to be young, why should you have ceased to have a temper now?

 

[peteanddelmar]

As you have not ceased to be young, why should you have ceased to have a temper now?

Yes, but 21 and 51 are far different. I do not any longer want to get in fights over a sport I am playing. (Don't play no more, though!)

 

[poorjack]

Along those lines, I tried to play nice in the corporate world for years but a recent event in my life was cause for a serious re-evaluation of my life course. I decided that I was no longer going to tolerate being lied to, used, back stabbed, and passed over by favoritism. I was going to just do my task strictly according to job description and go home and stay on that course until I could get ready to embark on a new course. Part of that meant I had no time to listen to, nor entertain, foolishness by coworkers. Not that I was mean or harsh with them, but Mr. Easygoing had left the building, never to return. When lied to, I pointed it out publicly. When passed over (again) I pointed out the personal connections of the person who got the gig and lack of qualifications of said person. When asked why I didn't do extra like I used to, I pointed out my job description was the limit of my cooperation. It made for a very uncomfortable time when the corporate kiddos found that somebody now had no issue with pointing out the lack of the clothing on the emperor.

Well, I am now on the new course and much happier and self employed as a contractor. It's a bit more scary since there's no daily grind in one place, but there is a much greater satisfaction in what I'm doing. Part of the way I look at working on old structures is that building is older than me and now I'm a part of the story of that building. Builders have a long tradition of leaving things or notes inside of walls or other places, I've found them from people long gone and now I leave them for another so I'm now a part of the story. There is a deep seated satisfaction and pride in doing something that will likely outlast my lifetime and be enjoyed by others still to come.

I still have little patience for those who engage in the types of behaviour that seems to infest parts of the corporate sphere and that goes back to the topic of the op. When I look at research done by others, if it's documented and well done, then I'll listen. If it's not well supported by factual evidence, then it's in the realm of an opinion and we know the characteristics of those. There are those with the "knowledge" and they use it as power rather than sharing it with others and that sets the stage for errors and misconceptions that over time become accepted as facts. So the question really becomes one of does this person actively engage in power games, thus altering the past, or does this person give of the knowledge they have to help others understand and appreciate the past? Make the choice.

 

[Craig L Barry]

Wow, this one hit a nerve, to answer the question at bar, I would say "do your own research." You are not involved in a hobby to live up to somebody else's delusional expectations. You decide what you want to put into it and what you want to get out of it. In other words, beyond a certain baseline, you set the standards for yourself, not somebody else. Do the best you can and have fun with it. Nobody is going to die if you use red trim instead of black, or no trim at all if the matter is up in the air.

The only reason to do research is to answer questions, and the questions I had drove me to find original source information that I could be satisfied with. These things may or may not matter to somebody else. I think we tend to over do the details and hence, miss the forest because of the trees. Very few people have access to information which is not widely available if you take the time to look for it. So, rather than listen to what the experts say, do your own research and find your own answers.

 

[MRB1863]

I just wanted to vent for a moment about interaction in my unit.

I had been doing a great deal of research on outfits and accoutrement and mentioned this on an email thread of members. Apparently one of the older men took affront, saying that about every decade new reenactors came along and tried to do research that had already been done.

While it is possible that that is true , to say so with so little tact was surprising to me. I later asked this individual about particular styles of coats, to which he told me I was at a point where I needed to do my own research and not depend on him (I would add here that I usually don't ask questions unless I've researched and have some idea of the answer ). This guy also told me how he had learned to ask questions in college.

So I said to myself, what shall it be, to ask questions of those who claim to be knowledgeable or to do my own research?

I put this dialogue out there not for advice, but rather food for thought. Be careful how you come across in email and reflect upon your words before you hit send. If you want younger men or women in your unit, consider how you sound to them when you appear indignant about the very things that attract people to the hobby.

I understand that the hobby can attract eccentricity, but I hope that my insecurities can be less revealed.

Scarter,
Welcome aboard from 35 miles north of Gettysburg!
There are some who cloak their lack of knowledge with rudeness. Many astute students of our history are much more apt to help since they were in the "do not know boat" once too. Many of those who hold some information close to their vest probably do so for a reason. Sometimes not having the ability to analyze, understand, relate and interpret the data they have pirated relative to the other events of the time are enough to make them clam up. Perhaps they are not the experts they self-proclaim. Perhaps they just simply do not play well with others. Sometimes a thicker skin is of value. Don't let it inhibit your fascination and zeal!!!