If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If I remember the dimensions of the room correctly, the strange person should be sitting there. I think, that surely someone would have noticed a police constable with a bloody ass...
All right, seriously; it could be a flaw on the negative too. Sometimes these things have happened.
But the most obvious choice is a smudge on the window-pane!
Or then Jack the Ripper was Mike the Midget...
All the best
Jukka
"When I know all about everything, I am old. And it's a very, very long way to go!"
Hi Jukka!!!
Yep sadly it's one of those things,or a negative nasty -or there again there may be a / on the window- sadly I think there's not!....Mind you there could be a novel in that and how it got there - broken window my a**! LOL!!!!
Maybe Mike the Midget had a propensity to kiss windows!
Ah! -BUT if he went around at low level on a general day to day basis- we may have to look again at the GSG!! He he
Didn't they remove the whole window frame to take the photo? I'm sure I've read that somewhere.
And while I know very little about old-fangled film photography, being a product of the digital age, surely there would be no need for a developing pan on-site? Doesn't that stuff need to be done in a darkroom? I may well know the answer to this somewhere in the clutter of my brain from my reading on the history of photography, but I assume someone like RJM or Mr Clack might be able to answer. Never mind what Hutchinson says, he's utterly unreliable, and not to be trusted
Cheers,
B.
Never heard about the frame being removed to take the photo before, Damon. Sounds extremely far-fetched to me.
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.
And you can stick your final assertion right up your Wellington, NZ. And take your Crowded House with you.
It was suggested the pan was part of the photographer's impedimenta, but there was no consensus. And in any case the notion is wrong. The plates would had to have been developed back at the studio in a darkroom. There is no way the images were developed on site. Not unless the photographer arrived in a large enclosed wagon as Matthew Brady employed during the Civil War. Moreover, the process would call for four pans, not one.
Don.
"To expose [the Senator] is rather like performing acts of charity among the deserving poor; it needs to be done and it makes one feel good, but it does nothing to end the problem."
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!)
What is it? I don't know. But, to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a drip pan is just a drip pan.
Don.
"To expose [the Senator] is rather like performing acts of charity among the deserving poor; it needs to be done and it makes one feel good, but it does nothing to end the problem."
Comment