Reckon we already have the original.
Mary Ann Kelly's face was disfigured so that it would not be recognised.
The mouth,eyes and where the nose was are identifiable with a decent PC monitor.
Same with the rest of her in the 'photo.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
MJK's photo censored/vandalised?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by erobitha View Post
As I have Photoshop and can zoom in, I see more subtlety than you probably can on this version for Casebook. It is still poor clarity, but we are talking of a scan of photograph that is over 130 years old now.
It would be hugely useful to get a copy of the original print.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mark J D View Post
I'm still pondering this...
... but surely it is pretty unlikely that the late-Victorian mindset -- which backed away even from publicly describing Nichols' wounds in detail! -- would have allowed an accurate photo of Kelly's ravaged face to be passed down to posterity? Might we not, at the very least, be looking at a face deliberately rendered indistinct by a gauze placed on the flesh or a barrier put over the image before it was copied?
M.Last edited by Losmandris; 03-28-2022, 03:31 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Losmandris View Post
I am still struggling to see what you have highlighted on the original picture. I think you show where the eyes and the mouth should be in context to the face, but I just can make them out. As Harry D points out above, you would have thought that at least some thing would be discernible, but I cannot make out anything. You would have thought that the facial area would have been as clear as other parts of the picture, so you would even be able to make out individual cuts or flaps of skin. More than that, at least one feature like an eye or lips. but there is nothing. The part closest to the bed is just fuzzy almost, like as Mark J D has proposed it has been scratched over with a stylus of some sort.
It would be hugely useful to get a copy of the original print.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Losmandris View Post... like as Mark J D has proposed it has been scratched over with a stylus of some sort...
... but surely it is pretty unlikely that the late-Victorian mindset -- which backed away even from publicly describing Nichols' wounds in detail! -- would have allowed an accurate photo of Kelly's ravaged face to be passed down to posterity? Might we not, at the very least, be looking at a face deliberately rendered indistinct by a gauze placed on the flesh or a barrier put over the image before it was copied?
M.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by erobitha View PostFound a couple of what appear to non edited versions of the original image and tried to highlight where I believe the eyes nose and mouth are on the body.
I just think that due to the savage nature of the cuts, blood and hair - we don't get a clear view of her facial features such as her eyes nose and mouth. I don't believe any editing or doctoring has gone on here.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Ms Diddles View Post
Agreed, Harry!
Mark's theory would indeed go some way in explaining why I too have struggled to decipher anything coherent in terms of Mary's face.
Originally posted by erobitha View PostFound a couple of what appear to non edited versions of the original image and tried to highlight where I believe the eyes nose and mouth are on the body.
I just think that due to the savage nature of the cuts, blood and hair - we don't get a clear view of her facial features such as her eyes nose and mouth. I don't believe any editing or doctoring has gone on here.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by erobitha View Post
Good question. I am not 100% certain these are the original copies I found.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Found a couple of what appear to non edited versions of the original image and tried to highlight where I believe the eyes nose and mouth are on the body.
I just think that due to the savage nature of the cuts, blood and hair - we don't get a clear view of her facial features such as her eyes nose and mouth. I don't believe any editing or doctoring has gone on here.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Harry D View PostI'm glad more people are talking about this. I thought there was something wrong with me that I couldn't decipher a single feature from that grisly image.
Mark's theory would indeed go some way in explaining why I too have struggled to decipher anything coherent in terms of Mary's face.
Leave a comment:
-
I'm glad more people are talking about this. I thought there was something wrong with me that I couldn't decipher a single feature from that grisly image.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mark J D View Post
"One day men will look back and say I gave birth to the twentieth century..."
As I once heard a man say in a film...
M.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: