Police officer portraits show thread

[SiPo]

Some really great additions to one of the best threads on the forum.

[Gerd W.]

Here one out of Berlin..........very early Schutzmannschaft, 1865/1870

(1866 they changed the uniform to 2 rows of buttons and no longer epaulettes for Leutnant/Hauptmann)

[Willi Z.]

Gerd, before I bought this first pattern M1860 Beamte Pickelhaube, I found 2 photos on this thread. They were the only photos I could find anywhere of the Pickelhaube being worn. Thanks!

Are they Zollbeamten?

[Gerd W.]

Gerd, before I bought this first pattern M1860 Beamte Pickelhaube, I found 2 photos on this thread. They were the only photos I could find anywhere of the Pickelhaube being worn. Thanks!
Are they Zollbeamten?

Nice Haube Willi !



The officer on my portraits are Kommunalpolizei. I believe these portraits post 1866.



I have a M1860 Pickelhaube and an original 1861 sale flyer (Mohr & Speyer Berlin). As you can see, these will show a lot higher body.

[Hundestaffel]

.

[Gerd W.]

Here one out of Berlin..........very early Schutzmannschaft, 1865/1870

(1866 they changed the uniform to 2 rows of buttons and no longer epaulettes for Leutnant/Hauptmann)

This photo went lost in German mail within the last 2 weeks


I´m sure it has been stolen. Please let me know, if it turns up somewhere on this planet.

.

[Gerd W.]

Non mounted and mounted Landgendarm are posing........the Brigadier beside

[Mil-Archive]

.

That's one I bought on ebay and hasnt arrived yet. Maybe we should only post photos we own rather than anything from the internet.

[W.Unland]

That's one I bought on ebay and hasnt arrived yet. Maybe we should only post photos we own rather than anything from the internet.

Why is that? If they are in the public domain and offer some information of value to the collector, are we obliged to consider the "rights" of any potential FUTURE owner?
There is no legal theory that can support that, at least as far as the USA is concerned. You can't claim copyright over something you didn't own when it was posted. That would mean that if I bought a famous artwork I could demand that all past photos of it in books, on the net, or in catalogs must be removed.

The collector community has changed a lot since I started on this forum. Originally everyone shared freely to help the general knowledge. Then there was some constraint so as not to help forgers. Now it seems we are only interested in selling things and monetizing everything. What harm did you suffer by this photo being posted.......just curious?

Respectfully,
W. Unland

[Mil-Archive]

Why is that? If they are in the public domain and offer some information of value to the collector, are we obliged to consider the "rights" of any potential FUTURE owner?
There is no legal theory that can support that, at least as far as the USA is concerned. You can't claim copyright over something you didn't own when it was posted. That would mean that if I bought a famous artwork I could demand that all past photos of it in books, on the net, or in catalogs must be removed.

The collector community has changed a lot since I started on this forum. Originally everyone shared freely to help the general knowledge. Then there was some constraint so as not to help forgers. Now it seems we are only interested in selling things and monetizing everything. What harm did you suffer by this photo being posted.......just curious?

Respectfully,
W. Unland

Its not a matter of legal theory or monetary harm (in the case of this photo at least). It is a manner of basic manners. This photograph in and of itself does not advance knowledge in any particular unique way. It is not a unknown uniform variant for example. As a photograph collector, I think threads like this have more worth when it is collectors posting items from their own collection, rather than someone who trawls the internet to post photos they do not own.

[W.Unland]

So if I understand it then; if I run across a photo on the net I should, out of courtesy to a potential future owner, not share it.

Again I ask WHY?

I am not trying to be confrontational. As far as I know you are an honorable well respected photo collector. If someone was stealing your materials I would certainly understand your position. I myself have seen my own photos being used to advertise Pakistani fake insignia. but we are talking about a photo posted in a public context that was NOT yours when it was posted.

And again, as you state, the photo is not of particular interest so it seems to me that your real problem is that you want to claim proprietary rights to the image retroactively "just because". It offends that some one posted a photo that you now own, somehow diminishing your enjoyment of sole ownership. OK I just don't see the harm.

I have been down this road before by posting images from ebay demonstrating rather rare insignia in use which were subsequently purchased by someone wanting to sell them in a book. When I copied the photos they were in the public domain and not copy protected. Was I wrong in sharing the information? Not to my mind. The aspiring author never did produce his book, and subsequently the photos would have remained unknown. Again, I just don't see the harm in this. I didnt "steal" the photos, and I didn't profit. I hurt the subsequent owners feelings, and in his mind lowered the potential value of a planned publication. Is it my duty to protect profitability of a potential buyer of an image freely available on the net?

If we are limited to posting only photos in our personal possession very few period photos would be posted by other than specialist photo collectors such as yourself.

Im done. I do understand your feeling, but I consider your position a bit unreasonable. That said I am nobody. I have left the hobby, and really have no standing in this manner. I know the individual that posted the photo to be an honorable and considerate man. Im sure he would not hesitate to have the photo removed rather than cause any issue. I on the other hand am trying to make a point. It may be rejected, but if so I accept the opinion of the forum. Perhaps you should approach management about making such a rule. It wont help the hobby any, but it would "protect" the value of photo purchases in the future.

Bickering and infighting is in no small part my reason for leaving. I am honestly NOT trying to add to this pervasive atmosphere on this forum. I do wish you the best in your collecting.

Sincerely,
William unland

[Mil-Archive]

Unless you have permission then no, you do not own anything just because you see it on the internet. If I sell a photograph, I own copyright until the new owner pays for it then the new owner owns it from there on out. There is no in between period where its a free for all.

I have also seen my photos appear in all kinds of places, all over websites with the copyright mark removed, faked for sale on ebay etc. Most photo collectors have the same experience at some point.

I disagree with you about how this place would have no one posting photos if it was not permitted to just take everything from the internet and upload to here pretending it is yours.

In the long run the opposite is true, the more that happens the more photo collectors do not post on public forums. Or at least do not post as much. I know quite a few specialist collectors who will share material freely but completely stopped putting it on web forums for that reason. This means that unless you know those people to begin with it is a closed loop. That is the result of having a free for all and not respecting other peoples property/copyright.

I also own many images I would never put online. The rarest /most valuable stay offline and this group of offline material is probably just going to expand for most collectors. For many kinds of images I do put them online, I also go back and get detailed close ups where asked for and so on. As mentioned the photo on this thread being used as an example was not a 'rare insignia' it was a run of the mill photo posted in the middle of a long stream of images that are harvested from the web and not owned by the person posting. As an FYI I also for example own this one here (also not arrived yet)

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru....php?t=1035317

which I have no problem with being posted as its a legitimate anomaly and not in the category of the one above which is simply included as it was harvested from dealer or for sale sites.

[Todd Gylsen]

With SA Badge

[Todd Gylsen]

..

[Mil-Archive]

Office portrait :