The Comprehensive ACW Faux, Fake, Made-Up, Why-Would-Anyone-Do-That Photo Thread

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
17,633
Location
Central Pennsylvania
#1
cornelia no.jpg

It's not always the obvious photos misidentified for the obvious reasons. This snip is of a young woman at Brandy Station's hospital. She's all over the place on the internet as Cornelia Hancock, our Quaker nurse who left us agonizing accounts of her war. This isn't she. Why is that important? Because once we get sloppy about History it's all up for grabs.


Yes, it's been discussed previously. There's another thread or 6. The thing is, browsing Pinterest there seem to be more every day and worse, they get shared. Some you can track back to websites, some seem invented just for that site. Heck, the photo of Grant at City Point that LoC has devoted a page to, pointing out it's not real is there. Times 200. Just because someone isn't around anymore to object doesn't mean we get to run riot with their images- hence their lives. A few have shown up here on CWT, their ' discoverer ' hoping to cash in for instance by insisting we all agree ' Yep, yep, that's sure Lincoln and he's still dead '. Maybe a few others are just honestly mistaken. A thread here as a kind of repository may be helpful. For instance how do I know that isn't Cornelia? Beyond surviving photos indicating clearly nope, not the same person, she tells us. It's not always that easy, sometimes easier- like one of my favorites- Pinterest.
fake lin fam.JPG

Clothing here is around 1890. Thomas Lincoln was born in 1778. He died in 1851. So a little easy. I'm not sure we require documentation proving this isn't Thomas Lincoln, seems a waste. While I'm here, era fashion, what people wore is an awfully good indication of date and something we should really pay a lot of attention to. Styles changed hugely just between 1864 and 1866 for instance- it may not seem important but is sure helpful when it comes to narrowing down dates. In 1864 we were still at war, by 1866 we were gluing ourselves back together.

It's heckishly difficult digging for truth in the first place and striking gold. There's an awful lot of struck tin out there. In the interest of History, a patient reconstruction of facts, genuinely reconstructing photos through examining them seems necessary, no? Asking for contributions and help, too. I have a file stuffed with these things, just added two. It's not smug to insist on our own accuracy- it's History and it's all we've got.

Lincoln is the most popular target, poor guy- which tends to drag Mary along. Here's the thing. Ford's Theater the night of April 14th 1865 Mary Todd Lincoln's life was shattered by a shot- she'd been holding her husband's hand while they talked about where they'd like to go someday. Jerusalem, he said. Then he was gone, his blood and brains on her lap. DO we get to do this to her, or the tragic Rathbones, or the boys who lost that kind, funny father?

fords last day.JPG

That's also Booth sneaking up behind them. Like someone in Ford's audience that night just happened to catch this on her smart phone. I'm trying to not be snarky but it's hard.

They've been at this for awhile. Library of Congress's wonderful photo investigation of Grant at City Point probably catches Brady's nephew contributing to convoluted History. It's an awesome article.

grant.JPG


http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/cwp/mystery.html

" By learning to question what you see in photographs you can become a better history detective ", from the link. They're being kind. We can put History back where it belongs. It's not easy, profitable or popular. For various reasons folks love clinging to dug-in positions but it's worth it or like I said, it's all up for grabs.

hosp fake nurse pic.jpg

The photo is era and meant to portray nurses of the war but JUST portray. They were dressed to portray nurses, at a Sanitary Commission Fair. I'm unsure those uniforms ever made it to a battlefield ( or any other ) hospital. The women may have, we do not know who they were. Dix would have blown a gasket. Photo still makes the rounds as ' Civil War Nurses '.

It isn't as prevalent on Ebay now ( it's possible sending pointed emails to sellers was helpful ) but the damage was done- this stuff spreads. Some nice, era family photograph was listed as ' slaves ', something that you saw allllll the time. Because the family was black. And it's an old image. And it's obviously just another awfully proud pair of parents and an unimpressed baby ( babies are always unimpressed by cameras, why? )
family new snip.jpg


I'm adverse to posting post mortem photos on the grounds these were private images intended for private mourning during the worst moments a family endured-we've seen a few ' Lincoln post mortem ' photos. For some reason cashing in on a murdered man is trendy and worse, those images are all over the internet. There's IS one, soldiers on watch over his open coffin, that's it.

Lee doesn't escape although this doesn't seem to have caught on ( thankfully ). No idea who he was although bet a good military historian could at least narrow the field.
lee oct 2018 lee fake.jpg


Intent of thread is to be explanatory and cover misidentifications, honest mistakes, photo shopped images, deliberate deceptions and opportunistic presentations- and use as many facts required as possible to bring the conversation back to History.Above photo may not require more than " Gosh, it looks nothing like Robert E. Lee. "

fake linc wed.JPG

This now famous one, the Lincoln Wedding photo, tomorrow. Two different photos, taken by different photographers glued together.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
810
#3
1552573892970.png


Here's the one I frequently see for sale or depicted on the web that is often misunderstood or misrepresented. It is a stereoview photograph of a small portion of the Gettysburg Cyclorama as painted by French artist Paul Philippoteaux. So often it is wrongly described as being an actual photograph of the Battle of Gettysburg itself. Historians have scoured tens of thousands of Civil War photos, but have found nary a one that shows an actual battle in progress. Surely, Brady or Gardner or one of the other heavyweight period photographers must have set up his camera squarely in the middle of the action and waited for the perfect moment to take this dramatic "holy grail" photo of Pickett's Charge!!!
 

chubachus

First Sergeant
Joined
Nov 27, 2014
Messages
1,177
Location
Virginia

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
17,633
Location
Central Pennsylvania
#6
Haven't had time to keep up with this thread but that's just fine- fakes have been around since Day One of photo history, they'll still be here.

take this dramatic "holy grail" photo of Pickett's Charge!!!

Yes, the photos of paintings are all over the internet as real aren't they? Boy. That would be one intrepid photographer setting up a camera July 3rd, 1863. You just know there are more shots of Gettysburg than we've seen but the battle itself? Ouch.
 

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
17,633
Location
Central Pennsylvania
#7
Please, anyone trying to source this ( which is part of the problem, it doesn't get sourced ), there is no Lincoln wedding photo. Mary's photo as a young woman is a portrait, Lincoln's yet another. Someone glued them together and poof- The Lincoln Wedding photograph.

fake linc wed.JPG


mary portrait young.jpg


And another although it seems a painting and photo glued together
fake.jpg
 

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
17,633
Location
Central Pennsylvania
#8
This one drives me a little crazy- original is in Miller's. Confederate officers supposedly posing with their wives ( I think intent is they'd be wives ). It's extremely awful- pouty, er, full figured girl in front should be the first clue...next are women middle row, each around 3' tall.

fake officers.jpg
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
810
#9
1552930442047.png


"...Long considered the only known Civil War view of a battle in action, Gardner's photograph actually shows reserve artillery east of Antietam the day after the battle. What was thought to be the smoke of guns covering the fields in the center and right distance is fog or early morning mist. During the Civil War most photographers worked with the collodion-on-glass negatives, which required delicate and laborious procedures even in the studio. When the photographer was ready for action, a sheet of glass was cleaned, coated with collodion, partially dried, dipped carefully into a bath containing nitrate of silver, then exposed in the camera for several seconds and processed in the field darkroom tent--all before the silver collodion mixture had dried. Given the danger of their situation and the technical difficulty of their task, front-line photographers rarely if ever attempted action scenes. Printed from one half of a stereo negative, this small view served as a memorial to the single bloodiest day of the war."


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/283192
 
Last edited:



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top