Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

THE JACK THE RIPPER LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS : Dutfield's Yard and the Whitby Collection

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by George Hutchinson View Post
    Suzi - the post at #38 is not Margaret Addison. It's other shots of Marian De Forest (as it should be!)
    Sometimes you can't see the Addison's for De Forest!
    Regards Mike

    Comment


    • #47
      Good, one Mike! Merry Christmas.

      And Merry Christmas to everybody!

      Best wishes, Archaic

      Comment


      • #48
        My copy arrived in time for me to read on Boxing Day. If you hadn't said that some of the photos were supposed to be in colour, Philip, I wouldn't have noticed that anything was wrong. The b&w photos are very crisp and the text is excellent. This is a valuable addition to the literature. Well done.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by George Hutchinson View Post
          Suzi - the post at #38 is not Margaret Addison. It's other shots of Marian De Forest (as it should be!)

          I'm still waiting to hear back from the Womens' National Hall of Fame and Zonta, the organisation she founded in 1919 that is still going strong.

          Have a great Christmas, all!

          PHILIP
          Oooooops still who needs colour 'eh have a good un xxxx
          'Would you like to see my African curiosities?'

          Comment


          • #50
            http://www.waterstones.com/waterston...ultsPerPage=10

            couldnt resist posting this website for everyone to enjoy - possibly the most hilarious thing i have ever seen. Philip even agreed!
            “be just and fear not”

            Comment


            • #51
              Bugger I seem to have a miss print. My addition only has some strange geezer with a smug grin on his face standing on the murder spot of Annie Chapman..

              Where do i get the original 'Andrex Puppy designer jacket?'

              Pirate

              P.S. For those interested Philips lecture on the Dutfield Yard photo is Available on the 2009 Conference DVD price only £15 via Adam Wood.

              I have today printed some NTSC copies so if anyone wants them best drop me a line-PM. I'm happy for you to pay once you receive them and checked they play correctly but there are no sleeves as of yet for the USA market. Perhaps an Andrex Puppy?
              Last edited by Jeff Leahy; 01-09-2010, 08:49 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by jdpegg View Post
                http://www.waterstones.com/waterston...ultsPerPage=10

                couldnt resist posting this website for everyone to enjoy - possibly the most hilarious thing i have ever seen. Philip even agreed!
                That should boost the sales! Who can resist a cuddly puppy?
                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Blimey Garath dont let AP find out remember the commotion over Andrew Cooks Cover...

                  There will be blood..

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    That's fantastic! Lovely illustration!
                    Regards Mike

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                      That should boost the sales! Who can resist a cuddly puppy?
                      OMG!! That is so funny!!! I am going to save that page as my wallpaper!!
                      In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Disappointed with it

                        I have to say that some of the pics in the book were great. It gives a great perspective of what it was like back then. Now of course we all purchased it for the Dutsfied Yard pic. To say the least I'm disappointed on how it was presented. You had the publisher split the pic. The given reason was to prevent scanning to the internet. Personally I think that is a little beyond paranoid as there is only a small portion of the population who gives a damn and out of those most would just give a cursory glance and say, eh, no big deal. But for those of us willing to fork over cash to study this pic, I would be the first to say thanks for screwing us over. Because of your paranoia we cannot judge distance between the gates, we cannot do any accurate measurements, and we can't get a true feel for the murder scene. This should've been the highlight of the book but it's not and that'll be the reason I return this. And if you think you stopped someone's plans from pilfering this to the internet you're wrong. The murder location against the wall is intact so that would be what most would've been interested in not the entire pic. Thanks for close to nothing.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          You can't please everyone, John. I knew there would be a small minority of people like you who may respond with such an accusation - I'm just pleased that you seem to have been the only one. May I ask why you purchased it in the first place if you knew the image was already split on two pages? May I ask why it is so important to you to 'judge' measurements that are already known in intimate details - and are indeed in the text?

                          Presuming you have not seen the original photo, there is - at most - a tiny sliver missing from the centre in the book. Although I made it abundantly clear to the publisher that NOTHING was to be lost from the double-page spread, everybody here knows that they have ignored most of the instructions I gave them. I find it almost amusing that you think that's my personal fault.

                          Then again, there are people who would have complained if the picture was only occupying half a page, as it would have done had it not been split. I think I can live with one disgruntled return.

                          Paranoia? No, John. Experience and a chat and discussion with both Neal Shelden and Thomas Schachner in advance of writing.

                          By the way, we authors get paid about 3% of the cover price so your protest won't cancel that holiday I hadn't booked. You do appear to have had a free read, though.

                          PHILIP
                          Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            I reckon I'd be suffering from paranoia if I was that little puppy as well.
                            Count yourselves lucky that I'm in a good mood.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Now how did I know that Adrian Webb would come in straight away? Call it intuition. I've no idea what you posted, Adrian, but it can only have been one of your usual troll rants. You've been on my ignore list for some years now, so I don't have to read them.

                              PHILIP
                              Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Philip,
                                The book was in transit before I found out of the split in the screen. You can tease and mock all you want because you were the one who found the pic. Just as you couldn't experience the horror of MJK's pic if it was split paged, you can't experience your pic because of what you did. You said previously that you had the publisher split the pic so yes it was your doing. Obviously you care more of prestige then forwarding peoples knowledge of the case. At the very least you could have printed it in original size like you had done with the rest. I did find your book interesting in that it does show a few pics I've never seen and that may or may not sway my decision to return this, but I will repeat I'm very disappointed with what you allowed to be done (no matter who you chatted with and it's obvious your experience is not that extensive because ultimately if you allowed the publisher to go to print without preview shows your publishing know how is limited). I've read several posts on this site before the book was published of complaints on how you decided not to share the wealth concerning this pic and although I supported your reasons I was at least hoping you wouldn't milk this for ego satisfaction which is what you did. Nothing personal against you as I don't know you but you should be ashamed of your actions. Do you not think people who paid for your work deserve to see the pic un-molested? Sorry for the tirad.

                                John

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X