Historical negatives - query about processing and connections

[MattKing]

Can you post an image of the negatives with the subject detail obscured, but all the edges and space between frames visible? Preferably with a measuring scale adjacent?

 

[MattKing]

And I've revised your thread title, because "processing query" could be used for 1/3 of the threads in the B&W sub-forum.

 

[Gareth l]

Hobart, there were some smaller Kodak stores as well in Australia, and in New Zealand two in Wellington, as well as in other cities.

Ian

Hobart, thanks.

 

[Gareth l]

And I've revised your thread title, because "processing query" could be used for 1/3 of the threads in the B&W sub-forum.

Thank you.

 

[Gareth l]

Can you post an image of the negatives with the subject detail obscured, but all the edges and space between frames visible? Preferably with a measuring scale adjacent?

This is all we have scale wise I'm afraid.

 

[Ian Grant]

Looks like it's probably 120 roll film that seems to be 6x9 format, so a folding camera.

Ian

 

[MattKing]

I think I see a triangular notch at the top right, on the edge of the frame.
By the way, a blank white screen on a computer monitor tablet or large cel phone makes a great backlight for this. Try blank.org in a browser if you need one

 

[Gareth l]

I think I see a triangular notch at the top right, on the edge of the frame.
By the way, a blank white screen on a computer monitor tablet or large cel phone makes a great backlight for this. Try blank.org in a browser if you need one

I don't have these images, just the photos of someone else holding them.

 

[MattKing]

I don't have these images, just the photos of someone else holding them.

Understood.
But it certainly makes your efforts more difficult.
In reference to one of your earlier questions, do the negatives themselves appear to be the same colour? Are they all the same grey, or are they different greys or even are some of them grey and some of them light brown?
I ask because differences in tone in the negatives themselves could indicate:
1) differences in the developer used to process them;
2) differences in post-development treatment - unlikely, but possible;
3) differences in the quality of development - e.g. deterioration due to poor fixing; or
4) differences in how they have been stored or handled or displayed.
Each of the first three would lead to the conclusion that they may have been developed by different people, which might mean they were taken by different people.

 

[cowanw]

Looks like the photo might have taken by Pat O'Halleran, Tuesday May 6 1930, eh?

The Thylacine Museum - History: Persecution (page 9)

 

[Gareth l]

Looks like the photo might have taken by Pat O'Halleran, Tuesday May 6 1930, eh?

The Thylacine Museum - History: Persecution (page 9)

We know that four were taken by O'Halloran, I'm afraid the museum site is a little out of date as regards when the images were taken.

 

[Gareth l]

Understood.
But it certainly makes your efforts more difficult.
In reference to one of your earlier questions, do the negatives themselves appear to be the same colour? Are they all the same grey, or are they different greys or even are some of them grey and some of them light brown?
I ask because differences in tone in the negatives themselves could indicate:
1) differences in the developer used to process them;
2) differences in post-development treatment - unlikely, but possible;
3) differences in the quality of development - e.g. deterioration due to poor fixing; or
4) differences in how they have been stored or handled or displayed.
Each of the first three would lead to the conclusion that they may have been developed by different people, which might mean they were taken by different people.

The four known negatives are all the same as far as I can tell. We know that they were all taken within a short space of time on the same day, and with the same camera. Whilst we have a reference that suggests they were made into prints before 1955, only one has ever been recovered, that's a greyish black and white. It can be seen at this link.

Photograph captures a tiger by the tale

TAS: A fascination with the Tasmanian tiger has led a man to pay top dollar for a photograph.

www.victorharbortimes.com.au

The two images in question, or previously in question thanks to the help I've received here, are only known from prints, unfortunately those negatives are missing. There are two known copies of one and three of the other. All but one of these is a brownish colour which we'd thought was sepia, but have learned may not be. One though is black and white.

I realise that may not help.

 

[snusmumriken]

Looks like the photo might have taken by Pat O'Halleran, Tuesday May 6 1930, eh?

The Thylacine Museum - History: Persecution (page 9)

A shoulder-shot animal but already stiff. Maybe they had to send a runner for the man with the camera?

 

[Gareth l]

A shoulder-shot animal but already stiff. Maybe they had to send a runner for the man with the camera?

The photographer arrived the following day.

 

[snusmumriken]

The photographer arrived the following day.

OK, by which time the neck was getting floppy again, so they propped the head with a stick.

 

[Gareth l]

OK, by which time the neck was getting floppy again, so they propped the head with a stick.

As much as I hate to say this after all the help I've received here, but I can't go into that aspect of it at the moment. Of course I'll make sure anyone here who is interested gets the full picture after the results are published.

 

[snusmumriken]

The photographer arrived the following day.

But this page says that O’Halloran also took photos of the dying animal. Is that the puzzle?

 

[snusmumriken]

Sorry, your post #41 wasn’t visible as I wrote #42. Understood.

 

[Gareth l]

But this page says that O’Halloran also took photos of the dying animal. Is that the puzzle?

The Thylacine Museum is an ongoing project, some of which dates back 20 years, much of it has been superseded by later research. This is one example. There are two other images of the animal and it's still debated whether they show the animal before or after death. We didn't really know who took those until recently, and we're not really sure even now, but I think what happened in the past was that as O'Halloran was known to have visited and taken photos, these other images were mistakenly attributed to him.

 

[Gareth l]

Sorry, your post #41 wasn’t visible as I wrote #42. Understood.

That's OK, bizarrely it's the stick I can't discuss yet. The history of how the images have been interpreted is fine. If I can answer any questions here it's the least I can do.

 

[Gareth l]

The issues are now all but all resolved. I'd like to thank everyone for the help given, it's much appreciated.