Are these picture taking duds ?

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

I would bet there are some known color assignments in this one.......anyone know Pa Zouave uniform color details ? In particular the headwear base and banding colors and the color of cuffs on the blue roundabout.

self-EDIT: Here is what I dug up on this image.....

Captain Alfred Newlin’s Company G, 114th Pennsylvania, in 1864, known as “Collis’ Zouaves.” (LOC)

A number of Pennsylvania regiments adopted the traditional uniform of the French-Algerian light infantry, the Zouaves. They wore dark blue jackets, trimmed in red with light blue cuffs. Red pantaloons, white leggings, a light blue sash, a red fez and a white turban completed the unique ensemble. Although gaudy, these uniforms proved highly popular among young recruits.




CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Mr R, I took out the images that were pulling from Ashe's site... anyone who'd like to see the comparison chart (photographed by the Lowe's back in the mid-90s, they are copyrighted material, and Ashe has permission to put them on her site, but the AC doesn't have the same permission), please do click on the link on page 6.

The problem with trying to read the color scale, even given a three-wheel comparison chart to play with, is that there are so many, many things that can affect mid-century photography. These include, but are not limited to:

Angle of the light
Strength of the light, and relative warmth or coolness of the light
Age of the chemicals
Strength of chemicals
Temperature of chemicals
Temperature difference between the air, the plate, and the chemicals
How long ago the plate was prepped
The weave of the fabric
The angle of the fabric in comparison to the light source and the camera
Whether or not an element of the clothing is highly reflective
Skill of the photographer
Eye of the beholder
Age changes in the intervening fifteen decades
Color shifts when the image was turned digital
Monitor color shifts

One example: I've a wetplate of myself and my oldest daughter, taken when she was a baby. Our hair was the same color at that time (hers has since darkened from reddish light blonde). My hair, with me holding still, photographs very, very dark, as one would expect from period advice to photographers who have blonde sitters (yellow hair absorbs the light a lot, and should be powdered to prevent it reading very dark). However, my daughter, same hair, same sitting, but in the ever-so-slightly sunnier part of the image, and WIGGLING (dang kid)--her hair photographs almost white, and it may be because she ended up created a reflective surface of herself, hair twisting in a short burst of light. (Other colors in the image: metal wash-tub read grey, chocolate brown dress read medium grey, dark blue trim read nearly white, white collar read white, my bright blue eyes entirely vanished, save for the black pupil.)

The Meschers have a very good article with great images on wet plate color:

http://www.raggedsoldier.com/color_article.html

That page will get you to the download page for the article and image gallery; they're PDF.

There are dozens of great articles on their site, full of common mid-century knowledge stuff, so reading the archives in the Virginia's Veranda is highly recommended.

Frankly, even with a few known variables in the equation, period photography is *not* as trusty as modern (20th c) black and white technology. We can make some educated guesses as to colors and textiles, but beyond that, it's speculation.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Looks like the side seam because of the angle he's got his leg propped up at.
Fifteen men, eight definite white shirts, two more that might be, only one shirt that either has subdued stripes or a pleated front. The shirts that aren't white, except for the pleated/stripedone, are solid light colors. The man standing behind the officer's right shoulder seems to have a pleated shirt in some color. I count eleven mustaches and five beards. Also note the variety of hairstyles and the one pair of checked pants.

This was my natural and initial inclination as to the side leg trouser seam and you're probably right ...but seams commonly create a valley and as such cast a shadow or dark line...this one seems to my eye and monitor (both of which are pret near useless) to reproduce lighter than the material it consists of, or rests upon. There are extant examples of self-procured (as they all were) officer trousers with thin braided, corded or striped trouser side seams (some gold irrespective of branch of service). To my eye the color based tonal charachteristics of the leg crease, matched to known or high probability color assignments on a grey scale contained wholly within the image itself, seem to match the color of the officer shoulder boards ???????

I think you nailed it on the shirts.

Good times.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Within the same picture, and the same garment, angle and position can entirely change the way a fabric or detail photographs. So, even using color reference within one single image, it's speculation rather than science.

The line on the trousers (page 6) is in the side-seam... you can follow it up to his hip. I can't see enough detail to be entirely sure, but there doesn't appear to be a texture change along that line. However, a ridge can easily be created if one pressed a run-and-fell seam too hard... that would account for a ridge that's the same color as the trousers, and looks quite pressed and durable. Essentially, such a pressing compacts the wool fibers and makes a very hard impression that can be permanent.

[yeoman]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Ma'am and sir, I am enjoying this wonderful topic and wanted to pass along thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Here are a few images I hope will add to this discussion.
This image at Antietam, Md. has President Lincoln and General McClellan in the Generals tent.
I would point your eye to the flag on the ground and the one on the table with a "sash" on it.
Known colors and how they appear to our eye in the photo.


This is an image of Captain F. Bache, 16th U.S. Infantry. The second image is a close up with a good look at the top stitching of this officers trousers.





This image is at Aquia Creek Va., personnel in front of the Quatermaster's Office. 1863, February.
Some good looks at these gents wear.



The close up shots are in three parts..., do notice the boot scrapper in the middle shot.







These images may be found here.

Thanks for the consideration.

[tsgalloway]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Excellent thread. I love this stuff.

[Ian McWherter]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

To me, it looks like Captain F. Bache is wearing enlisted men's mounted services trousers.

As for the civilian men in the images, small turn down collars, narrow cravats with simple knots, short-crowned/short brimmed hats, dark or neutral colors. All characteristic of up-to-date 1860s clothing.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Within the same picture, and the same garment, angle and position can entirely change the way a fabric or detail photographs. So, even using color reference within one single image, it's speculation rather than science.

The line on the trousers (page 6) is in the side-seam... you can follow it up to his hip. I can't see enough detail to be entirely sure, but there doesn't appear to be a texture change along that line. However, a ridge can easily be created if one pressed a run-and-fell seam too hard... that would account for a ridge that's the same color as the trousers, and looks quite pressed and durable. Essentially, such a pressing compacts the wool fibers and makes a very hard impression that can be permanent.

Ma'am,

Seam it is, as I indicated was most probable.

I do not throw out statements of certaintity unless, well I am certain. That is why you will note probabilty qualifers in my suppositive posts. In an effort to demonstrate my supposition was based on extant historical fact and not pulled out of my primary point of saddle contact, here is an officer with the exact thin seam striping or braiding on his trousers and it has in fact repop'd lighter than the garment which it adorns....unless that too is a seam ????????



CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

This cat, I have always liked....shifty, pie-eyed loaner...

He seems habituated to pulling that chapeau down "rakishly" by the right edge over his eyes....taking a long draw off that pipe (looks like his hand has assumed a classic "hey Im holdin a pipe" position) and slouching his frame in a relaxed manner to take it all in stride.




CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[2ndva]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Hello Everyone

I’m just adding this image to the thread because I think it fits in with the discussion. Unfortunately I cannot tell you any information about it. I had used it as a reference when I was putting a civilian impression together. I copied it from a thread on this forum about 4 years ago. Maybe someone will recognize it and be able to tell us when it was taken and where for the sake of documentation.

[lukegilly13]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

The image above is a pic of a quartermaster department. It is LOC Image cwpb 04249
There is a little discussion of it on a very similar thread to this one that I started about a month ago.
What to wear, linen or wool? A question of temperature, culture, social class, or formality?

[Hank Trent]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

The flag picture in post #65 is a good example of the blue-sensitivity. Normally I'd think of the red and blue of a flag about the same, or the blue darker if anything, but the blue shows up noticeably lighter than the red on both flags in the image.

It's also a case where one might guess at a color, based on a known color.

Since coverlets like the one on the left often were dark blue and white, and the coverlet shows up as pale gray and white, one might be able to guess that it was a blue-and-white coverlet rather than, say, a red and white one. But that's only because we already how common blue ones were--it might just as easily be light gray or light brown or light green, etc.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Not so much in the Aquia Creek picture, but in the rest of the group shots, notice how many men do indeed have the top button of their coats buttoned and none of the others? Not everyone, nor even a majority, but enough to make me admit the custom did indeed exist.

[GreencoatCross]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

For those wanting to see some excellent examples of working class clothing, check out the link below. Lots of dark trousers, patterned shirts, mixed gray knit shirts, and a mix of hats and caps.

http://images.library.pitt.edu/cgi-bin/i/image/image-idx?q1=lysh;sid=5e5f75d86cfd7a10867b44053fb564a7;type=boolean;rgn1=lysh_all;view=thumbnail;g=imls;med=1;c=lysh

Laborer's clothing came up earlier in the thread and it took me a few days to find this grouping!

[prestontoprail]

Re: Are these picture taking duds ?

Thank you Brian!