MJK1 & MJK3 don't tally!

[Wickerman]

And, continuing on the same theme with Tecs, I just noticed a brief mention in the Standard, 10 Nov. (JTRForums) where the approximate time the body was photographed is mentioned.

The article say's Dr. Dukes was the first medical man on the spot (should have read, Phillips), and that half an hour later he was joined by Mr T. Bond, Chief Surgeon, and they commenced a post-mortem examination.

"Sir Charles Warren arrived at Millers Court at a quarter to two o'clock"

"The Chief Commissioner remained until the completion of the post-mortem examination, and then returned to Scotland Yard, taking Mr. Bond with him. Previous to the post-mortem examination a photographer was brought on the scene to take a permanent record. The state of the atmosphere was not favourable to good results, but the photographer secured several negatives, which he hopes will be useful."
http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=17007

Tends to confirm the photo's being taken between the door being opened and the commencement of the post-mortem, not at a later time, after the post-mortem.

[Wickerman]

On balance, I'm thinking that the photos could well have been taken around 4PM!

regards,

Hi Tecs.

I know this is a little late, but I stumbled across this little tid-bit, ....as you do

"Dr. Bond, of Westminster Hospital, is now (wrote this reporter at 2.40) in the room with the other doctors; and the body is now being photographed. A post-mortem examination will afterwards be made in the same room."
The Echo, 9 Nov. 1888.

Reading that, the reporter, now writing at 2:40 pm (back at the office?), has seen or has heard that the photographer is now photographing the body.

Regards, Jon S.

[RivkahChaya]

Of course it could be absolutely anything there though.

Kinda looks like a goat hoof, really.

[RivkahChaya]

Randolph Churchill?

ooooh yessss

sorry

Maybe they called him "Dolph."

[MajorParts]

Hi all,

Some are asking where the right hand can be seen, and perhaps these images can help a bit.

This is a section of MJK1, the photo itself is 480kb and too large a file to upload. You can see the hand in the center of the picture.

Jon S suggested this too. I really don't think that is a hand! I think Richard has the right position in his model and that you can see what look like clenched fingers below her right thigh/hip.

Of course it could be absolutely anything there though.

[Cogidubnus]

Shhhh....nobody mention poor old Randolph Turpin....

Dave

[MajorParts]

ooooh yessss

sorry

[RivkahChaya]

Nobody born in the UK gets to be called Randolph.

Randolph Churchill?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi all,

Some are asking where the right hand can be seen, and perhaps these images can help a bit.

This is a section of MJK1, the photo itself is 480kb and too large a file to upload. You can see the hand in the center of the picture.

[Stephen Thomas]

What do you call men whose full name is Randolph?

Nobody born in the UK gets to be called Randolph.

[RivkahChaya]

Some of us are possibly classed as diehards, I hate using metric. I was born and raised on Imperial and used it most of my adult life.

I was one of those American kids in the 1970s who was in the experiment to switch the US to metric. They gave us endless conversion problems, and we weren't allowed to use calculators. We were 8, 9, 10 years old, and doing pages of really boring computation. It made us hate the metric system, and really didn't give us much of a sense of it. It would have been much better if we'd just been given metric rulers and scales, and been told to go around and measure things, and then after a while, been given questions like "A cat weighs about A) 10g; B) 4kg; C) 8kg."

Like I said, the one metric measure every American knows is 2 liters. We all know what a 2-liter container looks like, and what hefting 2 liters feels like, because soft drink companies have been selling their products in 2-liter bottles for years-- for at least a generation, maybe longer. They probably started doing it just because it sounds too indulgent, somehow, to buy a half-gallon of Coke, and 64 ounces sounds pretty big too, but "2 liters" sounds hip. At first, no one really know what it was, and the bottle didn't look at all like a half-gallon milk jug. Now, everyone is used to it, and no one thinks twice about getting a half-dozen of them for a weekend.

[MajorParts]

Some of the people I had to deal with at work used to really annoy me with measurements! For many years I was a CAD programmer, taking technical drawings from paper and recreating them on a computer. Our CAD systems were always set up for mm, so drawings dimensioned in mm's were ideal.
Some customers would supply drawings that were in decimal inches, which isn't so bad because you treat the numbers as mm's then scale the whole lot by x 25.4
I hated stuff that was in what I call fractional inches (ie, 5 9/16ths)
It was surprising though, how many customers used multiple ways on the same dimension, like <-- 5" 13mm -->

Anyway, how is the 3D scene coming along?

[Sally]

In the UK, I think matressess (and beds) are still pretty much measured in feet and inches. We haven't ever really got with the whole metric thing here. Best we can manage is a curious hybrid.

[Wickerman]

Do you typically measure your mattresses in feet still? Or did you just give feet on the Kelly mattress because feet would have been used in the 1880s? I know the UK has for the most part gone metric, but there are still a few things non-standard measures are used for-- I still hear people's weights given in stones, which translated exactly to what the US calls a "standard" measure (ie, inches, feet, yards; ounces, pounds; pints, gallons), and not metric. Anyone in the US who does college prep science in high school, auto mechanics, computers, or is in the military, learns metrics, though. Also, every American knows what two liters is.

Some of us are possibly classed as diehards, I hate using metric. I was born and raised on Imperial and used it most of my adult life.
I worked for Westinghouse, in the Engineering Dept and the standard was Imperial, but because we were an American company in Canada our technical drawings had to provide metric along with the Imperial.

I just can't think in metric...
I guess I'm a dinosaur

Regards, Jon S.

[richardh]

Thankyou Richard, Rivkah.

Yes, a single was about the width of an average outside door, about 36" wide.
The bed in the photo (Kelly) looks wider than an average door, but not anything near enough to be a double size (English).
Three-quarter (48"w) is a good approximation seeing as we have no definitive data.

Regards, Jon S.

I concur