Donitz picture good or bad?

[sbas]

What do you guys think about this picture? Good or bad??? Ive heard that its no good?





Regards Sebas

[Tim DC]

A scan of the back would be usefull.
Also, does it glow under blacklight?

I know the story behind the person you got it from is no good, but let's judge the photo and not the dealer.

[sbas]

The story is I havent got the picture yet! I wish I did, Maybe I cant trust him.

But anyway I want to know if someone else has seen this picture before?

Sebas

[Tim DC]

But anyway I want to know if someone else has seen this picture before?

In fact that is not a criterium to tell if a photo is a reproduction or not. Most photos were originally produced numerous times.

[W Petz]

Sebas,

I agree you would have to see a bit more of the photo to make a determination...usually the best way is in hand and not a front scan of the photo, also the reliability of the dealer can be a clue to stay away from his or her photos. Bill

Tim,

Your first statement is partially correct but then you stated most photos were originally produced numerous times....How can you know that except maybe in the case of press or propaganda photos. A majority of photos were privately taken by the soldiers themselves. I have run into some groupings that have two or maybe three copies of photos but I don't believe that was standard practice. The Soldiers did however make several copies of certain photos like portraits...sharing them with their friends. girlfriends or family. Bill

In fact that is not a criterium to tell if a photo is a reproduction or not. Most photos were originally produced numerous times.

[sbas]

also the reliability of the dealer can be a clue to stay away from his or her photos. Bill

Thats absolutly true but thats why I ask this in the first place! The man is Thomas Hartman himself...as I just discovered when I had won the item! OOPS!

But I hear he is more honoust then a year ago isnt that right?

Sebas

[Tim DC]

Hi Bill,
Indeed I have little proof for my statement that most private photos were produced more than once. However, my experience with photo and negative groupings tells me that many soldiers group photos were copied for each person shown in the photo. The same goes for portrait photos (as you say, sent to family or friends), but also for the photos that we find desirable now: technical photos of tanks and airplanes, or photos of higher officers like the photo shown by sturmman (or the many Hitler snapshot photos we see nowadays). Not every man had his own camera with him in the field. These photos were swapped within a unit.
Of course there are many personal photos or photos of lower quality that were only produced once, but my thougt was that most private photos are not unique.

[Guenter Braun]

How can you know that except maybe in the case of press or propaganda photos. A majority of photos were privately taken by the soldiers themselves. I have run into some groupings that have two or maybe three copies of photos but I don't believe that was standard practice. The Soldiers did however make several copies of certain photos like portraits...sharing them with their friends. girlfriends or family. Bill

Hi!

I was a common practice to make many copies of of privately taken pictures and forward resp. sell them to other soldiers. I've mentioned it in alraedy in other threat: Some time ago I purchased an Album togehter with many single prints. There were several copies to the same picture.

Before WW2 started a special permission was necessary to take pictures inside a Kaserne. I someone received this rare permission, he was the only source for pictures for his buddies. So you will find the same picture in many Albums.

During WW2: If a soldier had the oportunity to make copies of his privately taken pictures he made as many copies as practical and forwarded/sold them to his buddies.

In some cases, were taking pictures was strictly forbidden, the copies were only forwaded to very reliable buddies and the negatives afterwards destroyed.


Guenter

[F L Clemens]

You are right, Guenter. An officer whose letters I am translating wrote to his wife often about having copies made back home of pictures he sent her. He sometimes also had those photos reproduced by PK unit near to him. So even at the front there was the possibility to have multiple copies made for members of a unit.
I think that Bill might have been objecting to the use of "most" as in the majority or a very high percentage. I think we can all agree that most photos were not worthy of multiple copies, but "many" were. I think Tim was really thinking of many photos, as in thousands, even if those were still a low percentage of the overall number taken.

[Guenter Braun]

I think that Bill might have been objecting to the use of "most" as in the majority or a very high percentage. I think we can all agree that most photos were not worthy of multiple copies, but "many" were. I think Tim was really thinking of many photos, as in thousands, even if those were still a low percentage of the overall number taken.

I suppose that privatly taken pictures had between 3 and at most 50 copies. They were usually only distributed within one unit.

Official press pictures were distributed in great quantities, e.g. 500 and more.


Guenter

[sbas]

But what about my picture? Colour ect???

Sebas

[F L Clemens]

I really don't get your question, Sebas. As others have pointed out, no one can say 100% whether the picture is an authentic WW2 print just from a scan. You have to examine it personally.

Just get an inspection period guarantee from the seller and be done with it.

[Guenter Braun]

But what about my picture? Colour ect???

Sebas

Hi Sebas!

Do you know the exact size of the picture?

The color looks like an old genuine picture, but this is no indication (1).
It looks more like a private picture and not like an official picture. The sharpness is not very good and this is a little perplex.

(1)
Until 1995 I made all b/w-prints myself. I remember there were some chemicals available to make new prints looking very old.

I also know that old photographic paper was (is) occasionally available on flea markets, house clearing sales und close down sales of long-lived photographic shops.

Conclusion:

Depending on the price for the picture: you should examine the print with a lens and a blacklight and ask the dealer for a guarantee that it is genuine WW2.

guenter

[W Petz]

Hello FL Clemens,

Yes that is exactly what I meant. In the case of kaserne shots I agree but as far as Combat shots much much less except maybe some speciali shots developed from the negatives. Now when we are talking about Officers they had much more of an opportunity along with the money to be able to have more prints made than the lowly Enlisted at the front (including the home front). Bill

You are right, Guenter. An officer whose letters I am translating wrote to his wife often about having copies made back home of pictures he sent her. He sometimes also had those photos reproduced by PK unit near to him. So even at the front there was the possibility to have multiple copies made for members of a unit.
I think that Bill might have been objecting to the use of "most" as in the majority or a very high percentage. I think we can all agree that most photos were not worthy of multiple copies, but "many" were. I think Tim was really thinking of many photos, as in thousands, even if those were still a low percentage of the overall number taken.

[Torpedomaat]

same photo

eBay.de

Regards,
Haruki