Is This A Painting?

[JPK Huson 1863]

I came across the oddest site ever, ever, ever last night while doing my usual trolling for History- it was all the heck allll over the place, with a section on CW Navy inclusive of WW1 craft. Maybe foreign, not sure, couldn't find a place to write and ask questions. This means zero, however, I'm terrible at navigating websites. I'd never come across this before, again means zero, thought probably someone here had. No, I realize it wouldn't be the real March 9th, just wondering if it's a painting or a smudged photograph since I really can't tell.

 

[Zuzah]

My first giveaway are the waves, they're usually not present in photographs, but with a combat photograph they could be crashing all over the place and the camera could be picking them up. Who knows for sure, do you have the website still?

 

[Ellsworth avenger]

Don't know,but I like it, Thanks.

 

[kealbo54]

Wow! thats convincing!My first reaction,because its hard to believe its a photo,is yes.What it reminds me of,though, is an extreme blowup from a larger panoramic photo,like some of the studies i have seen of the investigative photos from Pearl Harbor.But thats 80 years of photographic technology later..Its darn good,whatever it is.it could definately fool someone not at all schooled in 1860's photography.If it turns out its a painting,well,being somewhat a painter myself,hats off!Its well rendered.Almost makes me wonder if someone wasnt trying to produce a hoax.It also puts me in mind of the famous Loch Ness pictures.

 

[Pvt.Shattuck]

I did an image search and found it on this Website http://historylink101.com/bw/civil_war_ships/NavalBattlesoftheCivilWar/IMG_6097_e2.html
along with this:

Not photos, but intriguing. How about these?

 

[James B White]

What we need is more context. Here's the website:
http://historylink101.com/bw/civil_war_ships/NavalBattlesoftheCivilWar/Virg_IMG_6094_e2.html

Most pictures in the series of eight are obviously drawings that don't match this one. There seem to be three in the same style, with the same hand-written serif lettering, the one at the link above (#8), #4, and #3.

The "Burning of the Virginia," #3, looks least like a photograph. A search for it by image leads to another website which uses the historylink101 images, but which also includes another image with the same lettering, "Map of Hampton Roads." So I suspect that scouring the historylink101 site would turn up more images with the same lettering that all came from the same original source.

I'm guessing they were a series of drawn vignettes, but maybe someone can recognize how they were originally grouped, from the characteristic lettering of the captions.

This is why footnotes or other identification of sources is useful! If the historylink101 site had simply identified their source for the images, we wouldn't be wasting this time.

 

[TinCan]

I have seen that image before (the M&M) and I'm almost sure it is a painting. I mean, where do you think a camera would have been set up to capture an image like that?

 

[Jon G.]

I first saw the first picture several years ago in a book. I have always thought it as being a photo. I think that is the way that it was presented in the book........if my memory serves me right.

 

[TinCan]

Jon G.,
Remember, were talking about an era when you had to sit real still to have a picture taken, these vessels are moving, yet there isn't any blurring like I've seen in other pics of flags waving or movement among the subjects.

 

[AndyHall]

It's a not-very-clear photo of a painting or illustration of some sort. I don't think there are any authentic photos of Virginia, much less in action.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

Correct, I don't see how the OP image could possibly be a genuine photo of the actual event. The vessels look pretty darn accurate in outline, though. I wonder what the source is? Never seen this one before.

 

[Mike Serpa]

I tracked down a few of them.

Picture 1 is a Currier and Ives
http://hdl.huntington.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p16003coll4/id/1225/rec/223

Picture 5 is from Leslie's iIllustrated News
http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/mssc/merrimac/08mmbattle1.htm

Picture 7 is from Leslie's illustrated News
http://dotcw.com/destruction-of-the-privateer-nashville-by-the-montauk/

Picture 8 is from ?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/target_man_2000/5608539259/

 

[gary]

Painting. Those ships were in motion and the cameras of that period were incapable of producing sharp photographs of moving objects.

 

[AUG]

Iam almost 100% sure it is a drawing, although there are a couple of others photographs that are some of the first combat photographs ever taken and possibly the only combat photographs taken during the Civil War of three Union ironclads firing on Fort Moultrie, taken from Fort Sumter. They are taken by George S. Cook. When he was taking the pictures he came under shell fire, which knocked him and his camera equipment over.
Expired Image Removed

Expired Image Removed

George S. Cook
Expired Image Removed

 

[Kazziga]

Notice that there is only gun smoke visible in Cook's photo, there seem to be no smoke rising from the funnels of the Union ironclads. Are they all burning anthracite coal?

 

[tmh10]

Don't know how they did it, but I like them.

 

[jay gale]

I think there was one photo taken of the engagement, but it was from shore and not a lot was visible. If I remember correctly, exposure time for photos of that era was something like 30 seconds to a minute for the plates to fully expose....given that length of time, I don't think things like waves or fluttering flags would be that clear.

just my thoughts. I'll search around and see if I can find the photo that I referenced

 

[jay gale]

woot....well, that didn't take long.

here's a site with lots of images of the engagement....no photos but drawings and lithographs....I think that's what you got there

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/civilwar/n-at-cst/hr-james/9mar62.htm

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

It's a not-very-clear photo of a painting or illustration of some sort. I don't think there are any authentic photos of Virginia, much less in action.

It's always been a bit interesting and more than a bit frustrating that, not only are there no photos of the Virginia, there aren't any full-length photos of the Monitor, either.

 

[kealbo54]

It's always been a bit interesting and more than a bit frustrating that, not only are there no photos of the Virginia, there aren't any full-length photos of the Monitor, either.

Mark,isnt there one very detailed drawing of the Va in drydock around?