Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

[27thNCdrummer]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

My vote already goes to the first image posted! I think this is the key to an authentic looking image, it not being perfectly clear and developed.

[FranklinGuardsNYSM]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

I think this is the key to an authentic looking image, it not being perfectly clear and developed.

Not to hijack the thread, but I think the photographers and subjects in these and thousands of other images would disagree...

[BrianHicks]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

My vote already goes to the first image posted! I think this is the key to an authentic looking image, it not being perfectly clear and developed.

Allow me to also disagree... an image not being clear and perfectly developed are most often indicative of the photographer not producing the best quality of workmanship, or with an original image from the Civil War Era...perhaps the degeneration of the image due to age and poor care.

While there are numerous original images that are of less than perfect quality, there are also numerous original images which are of great quality, sharpness and development, as demonstrated in the post preceding this one... I don't think it necessarily prudent to use the lack of these qualities as the primary indicators from which to judge reproduction images for the purposes as set forth for these selections.

[Eric Tipton]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

... And that is ten images. Had to delete the 11th. Sorry Chris.

We will now select the final three and I should have those up in the next four or five days. Thanks to everyone who submitted. Good notes from Brian and Marc about original images. Sometimes, those LOC images are huge and very clear. On that note, I'm going to leave this thread open for a bit. I'm sure there are more original images that are out there that exhibit what Marc has shown.

Just please don't submit any new reenactor images for consideration in this thread. That part is closed. ;)

[MosbyCSA1863]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

I like the picture of "Some tired pards after a long day."
That one will get my vote.

[Parault]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

"Tired Pards" has my vote

[Eric Tipton]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

I wanted to continue Marc's observations about clear images and impressions - specifically regarding the images that are submitted each month here.

Here are the things that jump out at me when looking at the images sent in each month:

1) Weight. Can't avoid this one and I know that many people, when trying to sort out ten images each month pick up on this specifically. Not knocking anyone here, but it is true. If you see an image where the person has that period build, it supersedes the next four items in my opinion. 2) The Way they wear their gear. This one should seem easy enough given the vast number of photographs available. 3) Quality of gear. If it is a clear image, which is generally the case given the caliber of most of the wet plate photographers, then it is easy to pick up on someone wearing sub-standard gear. 4) "The Look" - It could be an expression on their face or just the natural way a person looks or the facial hair they wear or lack thereof. We have all seen them in the field - you are talking casually with a friend at an event when someone walks by that you notice has "the look" and you and your friend recognize it immediately. This one is an intangible and some have it and some don't. Unfortunately, in my case, if I grew a beard, it would look like Cliff Clavin in the old Cheers beard-growing contest. :) Lastly, 5) The Setting - The best images that I have seen submitted each month are the ones that either have a natural-looking pose, a really good setting, or a mix of people inspired by a specific image they have seen.

Without naming any names, what are the things that each of you see when comparing images?

[Shockoe Hill Cats]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

1) Weight.

2) The Way they wear their gear.

3) Quality of gear.

4) "The Look"

5) The Setting

Here's "my portrayal," if you will, of what Mr. Tipton speaks of. As an aside, none of these are from the Library of Congress! Most are forgotten ambrotypes or tintypes. Now back to our regularly scheduled program...

[sumter_guard]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

Jason,

That Confederate image is just awesome! Any information on it?

Andrew

[Eric Tipton]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

If anyone has an original image that they would like to see represented on the cover someday, post away. Let's see what kind of images you would like to see us aspire to.

[C.R. Henderson]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

Since you asked,

here's a couple that I've been trying to go off of and get done for a couple of years. I just can't seem to nail down where Wendell is going to be so I can have my tools there. (bad pun) Non military but what the hey...
(thanks Mark J)

[johnf1862]

"The look"

Although we've all seen this style of pose replicated, I've yet to really see anyone emulate this very nonchalant and relaxed look.





Image: Unidentified 1st Division, 24th Corp EM, 1/6th pt., personal collection.

[Shockoe Hill Cats]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

Jason,

That Confederate image is just awesome! Any information on it?

Andrew

Nope, sorry. Just one many unidentifieds that have become lost over the years. But it's a prime example of an early war uniform, that's for sure.

[VA-Patriot'61]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

Too many of the images people have done these days aspire more to the "hardcore" look than actually recreating an original style image. Many people tilt their caps or slouches too far to one side, fill the image with gear (even though its authentic, too many people like to show off their repop things), and they over dramatize the "look" they give the camera. The originals I've looked at over the years and the images of my ancestors are hard to replicate based on the criteria that we're discussing. Few people can honestly pull off the worn out look of men who have been campaigning or drilling in camp, the distant stare into the camera of boys who have been thrust into manhood too quickly, seeing things they never expected to see on the battlefields.

Not knocking anyones image, its just hard to really replicate the majority of those original images. I love to see images living historians have made based off actual photos that are plain and simple but also have small things like watch chains or a small pin or badge, nothing very extravagant or showy. I hope to see more images based off of originals get submitted for the cover in the future, those are really impressive and eye catching because I do a double take and look it over to see if its actually an original or not which is fun to do.

[kazrosiecki]

Re: Wanna Be on the September Cover of the AC?

In addition to what Mr. Smith said, I keep watch on whether or not reenactors unroll their trousers. Many it seems, myself included, role up their cuffs. I know it was done, but it seems most soldiers remembered to un-cuff their pants. It is the small and simple details of reproduction images that are neat.

It is truly hard to achieve that “look”.

Regards,