Today, let's talk about some handy tips to determine whether #FWW photographs you might have at home are Canadian or British official šš¼š§µ
Photograph is: Ivor Castle, A trench on the Canadian Front showing Trunk Holes, May 1917, private collection.
Photographs were available to private buyers in a number of ways - as postcards (Canadian official sold by the Daily Mirror), stereograph cards (Underwood and Underwood, Keystone), or even lantern slides (Newton).
Private buyers (ie. not newspapers or galleries) could also purchase photographic prints. For example, in the time period of 2 November 1918 - 25 January 1919, records show that the Canadian War Records Office sold more than 8,900 prints.
Who bought them? A mix of both military and civilians (the CWRO gave a discount to service members).
Rider-Rider collected numerous orders all along the Western Front, and sent them to London to be fulfilled. It's always fun to see his handwritten order forms.
What are some physical identifiers of official prints? They're normally all 6x8" in size.
(Private photographs that soldiers took were normally much smaller in size).
Canadian official photographers normally have a negative number on them, beginning with the letter "O" followed by numbers.
This one is barely visible, is backwards, and is scratched on the lower left of this image.
Photograph is: Harry Knobel, Bacon - 1st Divisional Train, July 1916, private collection.
Slightly later prints will have it more visible from the front, like these Ivor Castle photographs from the @SeaforthOfC collection.
A Canadian covered in mud returning from the trenches, March 1917, Seaforth Highlanders Regimental Archives, 2018.413.1027.
You might also see a number written in pencil on the back, or - if you're lucky - a typed caption.
Canadian official photographs have negative numbers beginning with O, while British will have multiple letters, like D, C, K, N, etc.
Newer versions of British will all have Q.
(Notice how the above prints have press stamps? that's a pretty good sign that they were commercial in nature and were sold privately (to make their way to your collection) but long after the war ended).
Another sign: is it embossed on the front with "Copyright Canada 1919"? Many official prints were sold in Canada for years after the war, and they have this stamp (lower left corner).
Photograph is: Ivor Castle, "Sister Susie's brothers mending shirts which Sister Susie stitched," May 1917, Seaforth Highlanders Regimental Archives, 2018.413.1463.
So, OK. You've got a photograph in your collection that looks official but you are unable to look at the back of it because it's glued into an album.
What now?!
Well friends, I'm happy to say I've run into this several times as an under-paid and over-caffeinated art museum employee.
Does your photograph-glued-in-album have a caption? A *good* amount of the time (not always) the purchaser copied the title verbatim, or close enough.
Head over the Library and Archives Canada website (Canadian photos) or National Library of Scotland (British) and search for that title in their search bar.
Why the heck am I sending you to the National Library of Scotland for British photographs? Why not the IWM?
Well kids - the IWM changed a lot of those 100+ year titles, meaning you can't search for them anymore. Nat Lib Scot didn't! Hurrah, thanks to our Scottish pals.
Summary: Look at the size, look for a negative number, does it have press stamps?, is it embossed?, search out a caption if you have one.
Questions? Concerns? Also under-paid and over-caffeinated? I'm here for you and your super cool photographic collections ššš¼
ā¢ ā¢ ā¢
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've got just enough time to answer another question from last week's photography talk with @LCMSDS.
This one is from @crg498: "Rider-Rider is an interesting surname. What can you tell us about his background and family history?"
Rider-Rider IS an unusual surname. So much so, that Iāve had a TON of trouble finding much about his genealogy. We know that he married a Rosina Ada Hill and that they had a son together less than 9 months later.
What did they name that babe? William Rider-Rider, of course.
Seriously, of all the photographers, R-R is the one for whom I have the least genealogical information.
I've got far more on his wife, Rosina Ada, who was blessed with a less ridiculous surname.
War photography exhibitions date back to the mid-19th century. Some of the earliest included images of the Crimea and the US Civil War.
In recent decades, we've seen some excellent exhibitions of #warphotos, and I've listed a few catalogues here below šš½
One of the most important texts that you need to check out is Anne Wilkes Tucker (et alās) āWar/Photography: Images of Armed Conflict and its Aftermath.ā This exhibition was mounted at the MFA Houston in 2012.
War/Photography takes a thematic approach to how wars have been photographed across the decades.
It weighs about 28 lbs to carry, but it's worth the sore arms.
Today Iāve got a bunch of great memoirs - all written by early press photographers and all have links to download foā free!
(Photo by Emre Can Acer from Pexels)
To start, here's Herbert Baldwin's "A War Photographer in Thrace." Baldwin was later hired as Australia's official photographer for a brief time in the #FWW.
Grant was a photographer at the Daily Mirror who photographed the Balkan Wars before heading up to Belgium in August 1914 to cover the events unfolding there.
First of all, collectors do love to get their hands on vintage prints. In a lot of cases it means you've acquired a print made by the person who also took the negative. Having both would be a serious coup šš»š§µ
It's important to note that some photographers almost never made prints from their own negatives. Photojournalists are sometimes a good example of this.
First World War photographers had a hand in developing their negs, but they didn't make prints.
BUT having a 100+ year old print that's A) made with historic materials and B) lived a good long life and C) was printed by the same guy who did all the other prints has something that theorist Walter Benjamin calls the "aura."
Photograph taken by Ivor Castle, September 1916, O-758. This photograph was taken close to the same time as Castle's series Over the Top šš»šš»
It's not super weird that the NY Tribune published it nearly 2 years later. The New York Times' Midweek Pictorial also published photographs a little later than when they were taken (not always this late though).
An essay on the NYT photographs is on my long to-do list.
The research for it was, get this, FUNDED! Thanks @RICgallery, you are amazing.
I spend most of my time analyzing how #VimyRidge was represented in photographs, but every now and then I have to turn to text too.
A few things to point out in this 1917 article from the Canadian War Pictorial šš»
One thing to admit: this is only one report of the battle but it was written by the Canadian War Records Office, and who was more likely to aggrandize this event than the Canadians who produced wartime propaganda?*
*Propaganda meant something v different in 1917. You can thank the SWW & rise of fascism for that.