Face in the window?

[Supe]

Philup,

I am not suggesting the gentleman you heard lecture was not an expert, but perhaps you misheard him. As it is, for a negative (of any sort) to be fixed it must first be developed and then run through a stop bath. And that is not something easily done on site--unless, as I said earlier, he had a portable darkroom.Such a darkroom would not fit down the alley and to think he left it outsde the court with the milling crowd seems beyond belief.

Really, Mr. Michael describes the process much better in his article than I could here. But developing glass plate negatives on site in the conditions prevailing in Miller's Court that day would be unduly cumbrous and difficult.

Don.

[George Hutchinson]

Being a postcard collector as well, I attended a long lecture earlier this year on Lloyd of Albury, who was one of the most prolific and respected postcard photographers of the early 1900s.

The information I put up here about photography is what I was told at this lecture by an early photographic expert. If he wasn't an expert, then he fooled a whole room of postcard collectors.

Of course the photographic positives are made in a dark room using the various pans, but the image had to be fixed on site.

I can easily accept that the pan there IS a drip pan though there WAS a general concensus in 2006 that it was part of Martin's apparatus. A general concensus need not be a total concensus.

PHILIP

[Supe]

Bailey,

tho in all fairness it's hardly a point that affects the case much either way.

The drip pan (or whatever) probably doesn't affect the evidence, but that it had anything to do with the photographer developing glass plates or even sheet film (which was just appearing) is almost assuredly wrong. Large developing tanks in which the plates would suspended to protect both the brittle glass and and sensitive emulsion would normally be used.

If you woulds like further information on the subject I would suggest William Michael's article "Photographing Miller's Court" in Ripperologist 80 (June 2007) in which there is a full discussion of the cameras, film and equipment available in the fall of 1888.

Don.

[Bailey]

Never heard about the frame being removed to take the photo before, Damon. Sounds extremely far-fetched to me.

It does to me, too, but I'm sure I've read it somewhere over the years, and more than one somewhere, too. Could be a case of brain failure on my part, but I'll keep an eye out for it

Developing pans were certainly needed. This is why, on plate-glass photography, you see images of guys with big black cloths over them when they take the shot. The image has to be developed under the cloth and in the box after being taken. Photographers often had to have location assistants in the same way that golfers have caddys.

Well how about that... although others seem to duspute this point further down the thread. I shall remain undecided, tho in all fairness it's hardly a point that affects the case much either way.

And you can stick your final assertion right up your Wellington, NZ. And take your Crowded House with you.

PHILIP

Crowded House my bottom. That little Finn Jr kid ruined Split Enz...

Cheers,
B.

[Dan Norder]

It was suggested the pan was part of the photographer's impedimenta, but there was no consensus.

Considering that a number of your friends were arguing quite forcefully that it wasn't a pan at all but a hole in the ground and they claimed that position was the consensus opinion of people whose supposed expertise on such matters could not be questioned, I am encouraged to see that at least you are admitting that it is a pan. Of course if you refused to accept that and said it wasn't the consensus it wouldn't change what it really was anyway...

[Mike Covell]

There are two faces in the window, the one seen in the lower point of the corner, and the one seen further up in the window. It is quite obviously Abberline kissing Mary Kelly before she flee's to Ireland!

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Don-Ok what is it then?

I suppose it's too big to have been the ash-pan from beneath Mary Kell's fireplace, is it?

[Suzi]

Sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Suzi]

Ooooooooooooooops sorry- REALLY sorry!¬¬¬ Suzi xx

[Admin]

Posters are reminded to not load joke attachments to the Casebook and to use an offsite hosting company for non-serious and non-Ripper attachments.

Thank you.

[Suzi]

Suzi,

What is it? I don't know. But, to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a drip pan is just a drip pan.

Don.

What?? Don?? Would that be a Drop Pan Centre??? (somewhere for the terminally clumsy!)

[Supe]

Suzi,

What is it? I don't know. But, to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a drip pan is just a drip pan.

Don.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Suzi!

Ahh, the lovely catsy was here!

(Though acting a bit naughty...)

All the best
Jukka

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Suzi!

Here comes the original copy obviously closer to the original size!

No face, no smudge! Seems like we have our new "FM" here...

All the best
Jukka

[Suzi]

Hi Jukka-
Just showed that pic to a slightly reluctant hubby who said Her hum 'It's a metal tray that's just been left there'- but couldnt offer anything else apart to say it was NO WAY a photographers piece of kit- I agree on that one! They took 'em back to their 'developing' place!
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Failing that it IS a litter tray!!! ( I didn't say that!)