Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Donitz picture good or bad?
Collapse
X
-
Association Member
- Dec 2003
- 26289
- Corpus Christi Texas/Tombstone Arizona/London & Westbourne-Bournemouth, UK/Tenerife, Canary Islands. Spain
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
Originally posted by Tim De CraeneIn fact that is not a criterium to tell if a photo is a reproduction or not. Most photos were originally produced numerous times.Last edited by W Petz; 09-05-2005, 03:13 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by W Petzalso the reliability of the dealer can be a clue to stay away from his or her photos. Bill
But I hear he is more honoust then a year ago isnt that right?
Sebas
Comment
-
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by W PetzHow 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.
GuenterLast edited by Guenter Braun; 09-06-2005, 01:13 PM.
Comment
-
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by F L ClemensI 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
Comment
-
Originally posted by sturmmanBut what about my picture? Colour ect???
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
Comment
-
Association Member
- Dec 2003
- 26289
- Corpus Christi Texas/Tombstone Arizona/London & Westbourne-Bournemouth, UK/Tenerife, Canary Islands. Spain
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
Originally posted by F L ClemensYou 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.
Comment
Users Viewing this Thread
Collapse
There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.
Most users ever online was 9,961 at 05:23 PM on Today.
Comment