Quote:
Originally Posted by Runscott
Could be much older. Example - check out the press photos on my website of Wagner and Ward.
|
Scott,
Nice examples! Just goes to show that with vintage photos, you have to take them on a case by case basis if you're trying to determine when the photo was shot, if/when it was used in publication, whether it's a 1st generation, 2nd generation, restrike, etc.
I still feel that later-year restrikes or re-shot photos are the more common occurrance over earlier unmarked photos being repurposed for publication, but in cases like the Wagner and Ward photos Scott mentioned, the supporting details point to those being the exception rather than the rule.
My main concern is not wanting to give the false impression that the situation that Phil was describing was a common occurrence. (I took his original question to be whether a photo clearly shot during an earlier period, say 1927 based on the content of the photo itself, but stamped by the newspaper with a later date, say 1950, could in fact be a print produced in 1927, filed away without any date stamps or markings in 1927, then was pulled out of a file and used for publication in 1950 at which point it was stamped with the 1950 date). I feel that kind of situation would be a rare occurrence, and would require more supporting evidence to make me think that was the case rather than the photo simply being a 1950's-era restrike of a 1927 photo.
That may sound convoluted, but that is what I was getting from his question. It just goes to show how difficult it can be to make an all-encompassing statement when dealing with vintage photographs though. That's why I prefer to take them on a case-by-case basis or, in many indeterminate cases, just call it a "vintage photograph" and talk more about the pretty picture on the front
