View Full Version : Supposed Jesse James tintype
goamules
19-Mar-2018, 13:33
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/03/19/jesse-james-jackpot-outlaw-photo-bought-on-ebay-for-10-could-be-worth-2-million.html
Trying to match a found tintype to a famous person seems to be a current "jackpot" trend. I'm skeptical of most of them. I could buy 10 or 20 tintypes, then play "match the person" easily if all they go by is how the person looks. They put way to much credibility of "forensics" that just match up the facial dimentions of two photos. If you tried to match a tintype face to dozens of different people, you'd get matches. It's not that good a science yet.
We all see people on the street or in airports that look surprisingly like someone we know, but is not. There are only so many face types in the world. The buyer's, "He noticed a marked similarity between the youth in the picture and a photo of James in a book." is very...very thin.
Where is the provenance? Where was the photo shot? When? What town? Who owned it? No provenance at all but "gosh, he looks like...Jesse James!" ?
Mark Sampson
19-Mar-2018, 13:37
This 'find' has already been effectively debunked on the photo-history forum. Didn't take long.
I thought I saw Billy the Kid in the background!
Mark Sawyer
19-Mar-2018, 15:53
On the other hand, Will Dunniway, who authenticated it, posted on his Facebook page that, compared to another authenticated image of Jesse James that came from the James family, the newly-discovered tintype was taken by the same photographer on the same day...
Mark Sampson
19-Mar-2018, 20:17
Well, what do I know? Only enough to look into who's paying the 'experts'. As the philosopher sais about Christianity, "Astounding, if true."
No serious Jesse James student takes this tintype seriously. Every month or so some starry-eyed bozo finds a photo at a flea market; announces it's Billy the Kid, Butch Cassidy, Peter Pan, whomever; finds a doofus, self-described expert; and declares a multi-million dollar value. The news soon hits the media, where such stories are known cynically as "too-good-to-check," and spins around the world for a day or two, before drifting into obscurity.
Exactly what evidence is there that both photographs were taken the same day by the same photographer? None. The same photographer same day assertion was made by one of the so-called experts. Evidence? None. The differences between the two photos are multitudinous. Look at the two images. Two different people wearing different clothing. The jacket lapels are different. The white shirts are different -- -- lad on left, collar tight; lad on right collar loose because the shirt was too big. Shirt & neck -- lad on left shirt high on neck; lad on right shirt low on neck. In fact, lad on right looks like Ichabod Crane. Shoulders -- lad on left shoulders seriously higher than lad on right. Ears -- lad on left ears lower on head than lad on right. Hair -- note difference in hair line on forehead, including widow's peak on left, vs. no widow's peak on right. Cravat-- same style dark cravat, but arranged differently on each lad.
When people look at two photos, especially when they've been prompted to think they are the same person, the eye (meaning the brain) naturally looks for similarities. The key is to look for differences. Finally, and just as importantly, there is absolutely no provenance linking the eBay tintype (photo on left) to Jesse James.
Interesting responses.
Mark, as to funding, It is fair to be suspicious of where the funding comes from, but on the other hand who else will pay but an interested party?
DBuck; Welcome to the large format forum. Would you be Daniel Buck of the WWHA? If so you are more schooled in the time period than I ( if not you are still more likely to know a lot more of the period than I anyway) but I do pose portraits and collect portraits older than 1950 and as to the photographic differences, I thought it might be fun to consider them photographically.
Jacket lapels. Left lad seems to be wearing two coats; you can see the edges on his (photo) right side. Is one an overcoat and the other the coat on right lad? It was quite common to have portraits done with the overcoat on, in the time period.
Shirt neck and collar. Looks like left lad is looking down and has his chin tucked in. Right lad is looking to the right and has a slight tilt to the right exposing more neck. This will effect the appearance of tightness and position of collar. The button detail looks common.
Shoulders. left lad has two coats on adding extra thickness to his shoulders, building up the shoulders. Suit jackets by themselves were designed in this time period to have sloping shoulders, which was considered stylish.
Ears. Again affected by chin up and tilt of right lad.
Hair. Pass a hand through your hair and the front wave will shift.
Cravat. I have worn a bow tie all my life which is a simple square knot like the ties of this style. a simple tug on the ends will expose more of the knot between the first and second throw, which is arranged to travel straight down.
Provenance is convincing and simpler and wonderful but that does not mean that found images (or any artifact lacking provenance) should not be researched rather than rejected out of hand. It is possible to identify found images. I have had a Rogi Andre portrait of 1937 on my wall for 30 years and just recently identified the sitter, Dikran Garabed Kelekian.
Any way I don't have a dog in the fight. Thanks for joining. I always like to discuss older portraits.
Kindest Regards
Bill
Bill,
My comments were in reaction to Will Dunniway, one of the two "experts" who concluded the eBay tintype was Jesse James. (The other expert, Kent Gibson has misidentified a slew of historic photos, most recently Amelia Earhart.) Dunniway said that the eBay JJ was identical to another supposed JJ photo, taken he said by the same photographer on the same day: "When it is compared to the much used comparison image I believe it was taken on the same day by the same photographer. It is very evident by the face, hair cut, jacket, shirt and tie that this is the same image of Jesse James at 14 years old." See, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/19/collector-bought-jesse-james-picture-just-7-ebay-told-could/
Dunniway says the images show the same "face, hair cut, jacket, shirt, and tie." But they are not the same. That's my point. If he had said there are several differences between the two photos, but he still thought they depicted the same person, that would be at least a more reasonable opinion. But he did not. Dunniway also has zero basis for saying the two images were taken the same day by the same photographer. He's blowing smoke. He has no idea who took either image or where. Based on that the eBay tintype is worth millions?
Some differences can be explained, but others cannot. The ears on the eBay tintype lad are higher on his head than the other supposed JJ in the other photo. Hard to get around that.
The complete lack of provenance for the eBay JJ is not fatal, but it's a serious problem because here are many look alikes out there. If you spend enough time trawling flea market bins you'll find images of anonymous people who look vaguely like famous people. (Google Alec Balwin & Millard Fillmore -- they are twins.) Ebay sellers often use the tickler phrase "I've been told this looks like . . . . You be the judge."
Ever since the one authentic Billy the Kid tintype sold for $2.3 million a few years ago, "flea market Billies" as they are now generically called, have been falling from the skies. The eBay JJ is one of them.
Bob Salomon
21-Mar-2018, 11:45
Amazing, the one on the left looks just like Jared Kushner!
CORRECTION: the published JJ image (on the right in the above post, was supposedly taken in Kansas City). There is no evidence as to where the eBay JJ was taken. Dan
ic-racer
21-Mar-2018, 17:55
Who buys it for $2,000,000 when you hit the Jackpot? Is it documented anywhere? Reminds me of the guy that found "millions of dollars" worth of "Ansel Adams" plates....I wonder if they are taking up space in his garage right now.
Mark Sawyer
21-Mar-2018, 18:06
CORRECTION: the published JJ image (on the right in the above post, was supposedly taken in Kansas City). There is no evidence as to where the eBay JJ was taken. Dan
Do you have access to the original tintype or other evidence, as Dunniway did, to make that claim? You're throwing around accusations quite casually, considering Dunniway's excellent reputation. BTW, Dunniway also cited "Computer facial forensics with 4000 points of reference says they are the same 14 year Jesse."
When I read "Computer facial forensics with 4000 points of reference says they are the same 14 year Jesse." I laughed out loud. Notice the word salad, "computer facial forensics." Ha. Translation: abracadabra.
Will Dunniway and Kent Gibson, by the way, who were both involved with the eBay Jesse James, also teamed up on the bogus Billy the Kid and Pat Garrett tintype that was a minor media circus last year. Even sucked in the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/16/us/billy-the-kid-photo.html
"William Dunniway, a tintype expert, said the photograph was almost certainly taken between 1875 and 1880. 'Everything matches: the plate, the clothing, the firearm,' he said in a phone interview.“ Everything matches that five-year period? Everything? Really? What, did Dunniway do carbon dating? Computer carbon-dating forensics?
Dunniway and Gibson were also in on the croquet Billy the Kid tintype farce. Gibson that there was an about an 80 % probability that the tintype depicted Billy the Kid, but that if he was asked under oath he would "deny" -- deny was his word -- that it was Billy. Figure that one out.
"Everything that deceives may be said to enchant" -- Plato.
Well, to my trained eye (trained, meaning I have 60 years of experience looking at people and saying "Where do I know that guy from?") the two boys sure look a lot alike, but if they are the same person, I don't think they were done on the same day - the tintype looks younger and the hair (bangs) is combed differently.
Fun spirited debate.
I still think the ears can be explained by angles of the camera view. I think I shall do a few of myself to try the theory out.
pendennis
22-Mar-2018, 07:27
No serious Jesse James student takes this tintype seriously. Every month or so some starry-eyed bozo finds a photo at a flea market; announces it's Billy the Kid, Butch Cassidy, Peter Pan, whomever; finds a doofus, self-described expert; and declares a multi-million dollar value. The news soon hits the media, where such stories are known cynically as "too-good-to-check," and spins around the world for a day or two, before drifting into obscurity...
The converse of this is also true.
For years a picture of Billy the Kid was proof positive that he was left-handed. The way he wore his revolver in his left hip proved it. However, no one bothered to take note of the apparent "flaws" in the picture: He had a left-side eject Winchester rifle, and his clothing was right-over-left closing. Winchester never made a left-hand eject Model 1873, and Billy the Kid probably wasn't a cross-dresser.
That's not the converse. Unlike the eBay Jesse James, the authenticity of the Dedrick tintype of Billy the Kid was never seriously doubted. In fact, a line drawing from the tintype illustrated Pat Garrett's 1882 The Authentic Life of Billy the Kid. The image was, however, misunderstood by many to be an unreversed image, including most famously Arthur Penn, the director of the bio-pic The Left-Handed Gun.
The 2011 sale at auction of the Dedrick image for a whopping $2.3 million we can thank for the recent plague of bogus Old West photos, most of which represent a feckless combination of flea-market find, obliging expert (or two), and hallucinatory several million dollar estimated value. Dan
Steven Tribe
4-May-2018, 15:46
Debunked by new experts consulted by Christies.
So a $7 tintype is worth.... $7!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/04/collector-stopped-selling-7-ebay-picture-jesse-james-2m-christies/
Some earlier sleuthing by Jesse James descendant Eric James, here, http://ericjames.org/wordpress/
Eric James is a one-man Jesse James photo debunker. Dan
Mark Sawyer
5-May-2018, 15:12
Some earlier sleuthing by Jesse James descendant Eric James, here, http://ericjames.org/wordpress/
Eric James is a one-man Jesse James photo debunker. Dan
Doesn't seem so much sleuthing or debunking, just insults and innuendo towards any who disagree with him.
If one has had to spend any time with Kent Gibson, Lois Gibson, and Will Dunniway -- who collectively seem to have never met a photo they could not declare authentic and worth millions -- you might resort to sarcasm as well. In fact, the sarcasm writes itself. Kent Gibson said that a Billy the Kid tintype was authentic, but if he had to testify in court he would "deny" that it was Billy. (I'm not making that up.) Dunniway said that two supposed Jesse James tintypes were taken the same day in the same studio, yet it was obvious to anyone looking at them the two two lads looked dissimilar and were wearing different jackets. The trio has blessed a dozen or so photos, known cynically among collectors as "flea-market Billies," none of which is generally considered authentic. Ever since the Dedrick Billy the Kid tintype sold for $2.3 million, flea-market Billies have been falling from the sky. Read up on Kent Gibson's Amelia Earhart pratfall. The croquet Billy debacle. The Billy & Pat Garrett and Jesse James & Bob Ford fantasies The list goes on. Dan
Mark Sampson
6-May-2018, 10:21
In the 21st century, where everything has been photographed (and can be found on the internet), it's easy to think that such has always been the case.
It certainly wasn't that way in the 19th century, or in much of the 20th century either, and wishing (or the promise of a fortune) won't make it so. Oh well!
Another day, another Jesse James photo. How ever did he find time to rob all those banks?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/antique-picking-jesse-james-photo-1.4638667
Excerpt:
****************
"After a few cold calls they connected with Kent Gibson, a forensic authenticator in L.A., who is renowned for his facial identification work.
"As a favour I gave them my input," Gibson said. Gibson explained to CBC News that he has developed a scientific test to score the authenticity of a photo, which he calls the Gibson Likeness Score, or GSL."
***********
Hmm, the "Gibson Likeness Score," developed by a "forensic authenticator," who is, perhaps not surprisingly, developing a television show. Dan
Andrew O'Neill
25-May-2018, 13:35
Doesn't look at all like Jesse James.
This might be of interest: "Adventures in Wonderland: Identifying Old West Photos," just published this month in the WWHA Journal, is my look at the use and misuse of facial recognition technology in authenticating -- perhaps a better word is alchemizing -- flea-market finds as valuable images of Old West celebrities like Billy the Kid, Jesse James, and Wyatt Earp.
The essay zeros in how Amazon Rekognition, Google Reverse Face Search, Google Arts & Culture, Face++, and Kairos can screw up facial comparisons of antique photos. A supposed photo of Wyatt Earp matched an actual photo of Earp, but matched as well images of Pat Garrett, General George Armstrong Custer, and Ringo Starr. The common link? Moustaches. Facial recognition technology is easily distracted.
I also delve into the media's affection for "Local Man Strikes It Rich" features, exemplified by a New York Times story published last November under the headline “A Photo of Billy the Kid Bought for $10 at Flea Market Might Be Worth Millions," which contained not a singe cautionary view. File under too good to check.
The article is in the September 2018 Wild West History Association Journal, online here:
https://wildwesthistory.org/assets/wwhajournal1809-adventures-in-wonderland.pdf
Dan
EXCERPTS:
"Rumpelstiltskinning five-dollar flea-market photos into rare, valuable images of Old West celebrities has become increasingly popular since the Dedrick tintype of Billy the Kid fetched $2.3 million at auction in 2013. If lighting can strike once, why not on a regular basis?"
"I did a quick, back-of-the-envelope study of my own, uploading the face of the anonymous man [supposedly Wyatt Earp] in the Burger and Reed photo into Google Images’ Reverse Face Search, which scours millions of online photos. It returned only 15 “Visually Similar Images,” including Adolf Hitler, Abraham Lincoln, and George Orwell, but not Wyatt Earp."
goamules
20-Sep-2018, 18:11
Your article sounds very interesting, it is what fascinates me. People dreaming of a fast buck. It's what drove flocks of runaways and starlets to Hollywood, herds of beach metal detectors, swarms of estate sale junkies.
That guy that found the Billy the Kid playing croquet tintype had a convincing analysis, including from some good wetplate friends of mine. But I wondered the other day: did he actually find a BUYER? People buy things that have enough market sales to believe they are valuable. Pinkham and Smiths, for a while, for example. But after a while, the 2-3 sales a year grow old, and future buyers are fearful. Would YOU buy a Billy the Kid tintype for $1,000,000, just in case it would increase in your retirement?
Every year there are several people posting tintypes on several different hobby forums I attend. They are often dreaming. Same with authentic Bonny and Clyde firearms ...there are more unsubstantiated rare finds than buyers.
Here is 182664a photo spread from the article illustrating the problematic nature of facial recognition software in identifying people in antique photographs. A supposed photo of Wyatt Earp matched an actual photo of Earp, but matched as well images of Pat Garrett, General George Armstrong Custer, and Ringo Starr. The common link? Moustaches. Facial recognition technology is easily distracted.
Garrett,
to the best f my knowledge the tintype never sold, in fact, was taken off Amazon and the agent, Kagin's, no longer represents the seller. Also, the supposed location of the tintype, featured in the National Geographic Television program has been debunked. Even the programs's executive producer now agrees they got the location wrong. In other words, the tintype no longer has any geographic provenance, which had been the one valuable clue in the entire pageant. As far as we now know, the tintype could have been taken anywhere. Dan
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.