Bobby Mathews tintype (1888 uniform)

[sgbernard]

Sorry, have come in late, but has anyone pointed this out yet? An identical Matthews photo with the same orientation was sold as part of the Vermont Find for sure:

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...25.html#photos

[TNcollect]

Originally Posted by sgbernard

Sorry, have come in late, but has anyone pointed this out yet? An identical Matthews photo with the same orientation was sold as part of the Vermont Find for sure:

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...25.html#photos

THANKS sgbernard!

That is exactly what I was hoping to find. It confirms that the tintype would have been a copy image no matter what the era.

I really appreciate the assistance.

Scott

[oldjudge]

My opinion, as I said in your prior post, is that it is not period. Its' value is minimal.

[TNcollect]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

My opinion, as I said in your prior post, is that it is not period. Its' value is minimal.

Thanks for the input.

Scott

[TNcollect]

The links have confirmed that this is a copy photo and dates from the same time period as the other "Vermont finds".

According to the auction links, these photos are believed to be from 1902- 1920 from the photographer information that came in the grouping. This tintype is a contemporary of those photos.

Why some copies were done as tintypes vs. paper prints is not known.

I would think that the tintype has a value comparable to the paper images made in the early 20th century.

Scott

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by TNcollect

The links have confirmed that this is a copy photo and dates from the same time period as the other "Vermont finds".

According to the auction links, these photos are believed to be from 1902- 1920 from the photographer information that came in the grouping. This tintype is a contemporary of those photos.

Why some copies were done as tintypes vs. paper prints is not known.

I would think that the tintype has a value comparable to the paper images made in the early 20th century.

Scott

Based on the image provided in this thread, I don't think 1902-1920 is accurate.

[TNcollect]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Based on the image provided in this thread, I don't think 1902-1920 is accurate.

What do you think and why?

Scott