Waffen-SS or SA or something else?

[sudhafen]

I recently bought this photo and I'm not sure what he is. The uniform looks like SA to me, but the collar patches look SS, no runes so maybe some foreign unit.
Or maybe something completely different? Hope someone can help out.

[Jock Auld]

I recently bought this photo and I'm not sure what he is. The uniform looks like SA to me, but the collar patches look SS, no runes so maybe some foreign unit.
Or maybe something completely different? Hope someone can help out.

Looks early, with single shoulder board and swas arm band on left arm by his mates neck. So I would not think foreign, too early?

SA, NSKK or SS?

I am sure someone will know!

Jock

[sudhafen]

Ha didn't even see the arm band!

Here's the full photo. Maybe it helps. The way the photo is printed looks like a twenties/early thirties cheap camera too.

[Br. James]

I'd say he's an SA-Rottenführer from his left collar tab, and his brown necktie rules out SS or NSKK. But what he's wearing on his right tab is unclear to me.

Br. James

[Jock Auld]

I have just recently found out on the research forum a tip from a member.

The tip is that if you scan the photo at a high resolution (1200 DPI, I think) you can see more detail than with the 'mark 1 eyeball'.

Give it spin and it might reveal more detail?

Jock

[randy@treadways]

Provided the optics in the scanner are such to provide enough resolution (I routinely scan at about 4800pi), the real limitation is the emulsion of the original film stock. In the 30's it was not usually anywhere near as good as in the 1960's and 70's. There are exceptions of course, such as with large format film, but I usually find that with 1930's photos you're not coming to pull out much more detail than around 2400dpi or so.

The other limitation is the lab print process... some of them were really excellent, while sadly others produced rather grainy results. When scanning a PRINT rather than the negative, your results might be limited as well. Scanning the negative (when it's available) almost always will produce the best results.

It looks like the picture shared here is only displayed at 72dpi, so surely there's a LOT more likely to be discovered there.

[sudhafen]

I know about dpi. But this print isn't getting any better. I actually photograph them with a Nikkor 55mm F2.8 Micro but as randy said, some of these 30s prints can't be blown up a lot.

[randy@treadways]

By the way, when our eyes get old and tired like mine, we an use a flatbed scanner as a magnifying glass, even if we don't have a need to digitally store a picture or share it with anybody.

I've found that handy from time to time.

[sudhafen]

I'm using a 50mm lens as loupe. Works very well too. But nothing on this photo unfortunately.

[Doug Kenwright]

It's not a camera, it's a surveyor's Theodolite, used for measuring angles. Two men can be seen with clipboards and are most likely taking down the data, one for the horizontal, and one for the vertical plane.