IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/04/2017:  11:42:28

Agreed, John, but as a former Art Major...artistic license happens!

G Edward Porgie - Posted - 09/04/2017:  12:04:18

quote:

---

Originally posted by IMBanjoJim

 

Agreed, John, but as a former Art Major...artistic license happens!

---

Artistic ignorance also happens, particularly when a studio artist is "recreating" an outdoor scene which he may never have witnessed. I've seen renditions of many, many things that were obviously incorrect, like horses galloping, pianos drawn with the lid opening the wrong way, and violins with round soundholes.

I'm sure that many sheet music covers were the product of studios which were doing many things a once, such as ad copy, handbills, depictions of corsets and mustache cups, and many of the "artists" were on deadlines and had to make some of their etchings from memory or from whole cloth. 

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/05/2017:  15:08:37

Here are some better photos, thanks to a friend, and a run thru photoshop.

 

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/05/2017:  15:10:23

And a few more...

 

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/05/2017:  19:00:03

And a short video of how the banjo sounds...

VIDEO: Waterbound on an old Mountain Banjo
(click to view)

 

cbcarlisle - Posted - 09/05/2017:  19:41:07

Jim, What are the markings on the pot made with?

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/05/2017:  20:05:03

quote:

---

Originally posted by cbcarlisle

 

Jim, What are the markings on the pot made with?

---

A former owner of this banjo, who is also on the hangout,showed me photos of the banjo when he got it at an estate auction in Macine, North Carolina, in 2012. Someone had stuck red and white sticky tape all over it to make it look more exciting. He had the tape removed, but some of the finish came away with the tape...a story so weird, it must be true...

Andy FitzGibbon - Posted - 09/06/2017:  16:26:13

quote:

---

Originally posted by IMBanjoJim

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andy FitzGibbon

 

I have seen a fair number of minstrel sheet music covers, and I have never seen one that depicted anything similar to a mountain banjo.  

Andy

---

Andy--they may be referring to something along the lines of this image, which was in Cil Conway's African Banjo Echoes In Appalachia.

---

I have seen that image, and many others like it.  I don't feel that they are anywhere near accurate enough to draw any conclusions from.  As John says, those could just as well be the artist's idea of a gourd banjo.

Andy

Andy FitzGibbon - Posted - 09/06/2017:  16:31:25

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 

I received a fantastic email from Jim Bollman and with his permission I am sharing what he sent me.

Here is a image that I have scrutinized with the help of a historical fashion expert.  Some things about it has us baffled (like the shoes the man on the left is wearing look no earlier than the 1890s).

If it was a tintype then I would think it was from the late 1920s or depression era.

But the media does not lie.  This is a ambrotype and that places it well before WW2.

The banjo looks to be characteristic of a mountain banjo but there is really not enough detail to make that conclusion 100% (to me a "mountain banjo" has the very special tensioning system and construction method of the rim assembly).  There are clearly no hooks or brackets.  It also does not show any tacks.

Is it proof of a mountain banjo well before WW2?  I don't know.  He could be holding a prop cobbled together.  But it certainly does look like one.

I am interested in this group's thoughts.

---

Could you clarify why the man's shoes have you baffled?  The Ambrotype process was out of fashion by that time, but that doesn't mean there wasn't someone out there still making pictures that way- particularly in out-of-the-way, rural places where mountain banjos would be most apt to be photographed.

My gut feeling is that it's a real mountain banjo, though it's impossible to say with the amount of damage.  And, even if it's a real banjo, it could still be a prop.

Andy

Joel Hooks - Posted - 09/07/2017:  07:55:38

Everything about the shoes looks very late 1880s at the earliest.  From the heel style to the side seam to the toe shape (very round).  They are consistent with turn of the century shoe fashions.  The shoes also have "speed laces" which don't commonly appear until the early 1890s.  

The man on the right looks like he is wearing elastic side "congress gaiters" pattern shoes but there is not enough detail.  That pattern does predate the ACW.  Even then, if there was more detail, the cut of the shoes could give a closer date.

I've been "out of the game" for a while on historical fashion but I am usually within about 10 years on photos by clothing, pre 1900.

The very baggy and short cut britches they are wearing look like 1920s cut.  The baggy pants of the ACW were cut different with a taper to the cuff. Pre war pants tend to be tight to the knee (similar to bell bottoms), a fashion that comes back in the 1870s.

Hair also tends to be longer before the 1870s and by the 1880s 'high and tight" is the style.  These are very general rules and fashion swings with popular culture and generations. Oscar Wilde had a huge impact on fashion that reached even the most remote areas of the US.

Clothing is a pretty consistent way to date photos pre dry cleaning and laundry machines.  Most people would replace their suits relatively often as they would wear out.  It is obviously impossible to know how many suits these guys had or how in tune with trends they were.

A few challenges arise with this photo.  The subjects give the impression that they are not well off so they are likely wearing off the rack, second hand, or homemade (but not the shoes which seem to be up to date).  The short hair could be explained by a recent bout of lice or stay in jail/ prison. If for some completely random reason the photo did happen to date from the depression all bets are off on fashion as people wore anything they could get their hands on.

The biggest challenge is that the quality of the image is very poor and damaged.  That is why it is inconclusive for me.

I am still not sure what to make of the banjo.  With the low level of detail it could be anything including some sort of occupational tool that we don't know about.  Since we look for banjos that is what we see.  I don't believe that is the case, and I think this is a banjo of some type, I just don't know enough about mountain banjos or all the homemade "flour sieve with a pine neck" banjos to make an educated conclusion. 

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/07/2017:  08:19:33

Would it be possible to get a higher res scan of the photo? 72 DPI images never have the detail.

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/07/2017:  09:16:37

A very good link, with pictures of early mt type banjos:
themagazineantiques.com/articl...e-moores/

Andy FitzGibbon - Posted - 09/07/2017:  16:04:14

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 

Everything about the shoes looks very late 1880s at the earliest.  From the heel style to the side seam to the toe shape (very round).  They are consistent with turn of the century shoe fashions.  The shoes also have "speed laces" which don't commonly appear until the early 1890s.  

The man on the right looks like he is wearing elastic side "congress gaiters" pattern shoes but there is not enough detail.  That pattern does predate the ACW.  Even then, if there was more detail, the cut of the shoes could give a closer date.

I've been "out of the game" for a while on historical fashion but I am usually within about 10 years on photos by clothing, pre 1900.

The very baggy and short cut britches they are wearing look like 1920s cut.  The baggy pants of the ACW were cut different with a taper to the cuff. Pre war pants tend to be tight to the knee (similar to bell bottoms), a fashion that comes back in the 1870s.

Hair also tends to be longer before the 1870s and by the 1880s 'high and tight" is the style.  These are very general rules and fashion swings with popular culture and generations. Oscar Wilde had a huge impact on fashion that reached even the most remote areas of the US.

Clothing is a pretty consistent way to date photos pre dry cleaning and laundry machines.  Most people would replace their suits relatively often as they would wear out.  It is obviously impossible to know how many suits these guys had or how in tune with trends they were.

A few challenges arise with this photo.  The subjects give the impression that they are not well off so they are likely wearing off the rack, second hand, or homemade (but not the shoes which seem to be up to date).  The short hair could be explained by a recent bout of lice or stay in jail/ prison. If for some completely random reason the photo did happen to date from the depression all bets are off on fashion as people wore anything they could get their hands on.

The biggest challenge is that the quality of the image is very poor and damaged.  That is why it is inconclusive for me.

I am still not sure what to make of the banjo.  With the low level of detail it could be anything including some sort of occupational tool that we don't know about.  Since we look for banjos that is what we see.  I don't believe that is the case, and I think this is a banjo of some type, I just don't know enough about mountain banjos or all the homemade "flour sieve with a pine neck" banjos to make an educated conclusion. 

---

That makes a lot more sense.  Thanks.

Andy

Viper - Posted - 09/08/2017:  11:03:50

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

 

Everything about the shoes looks very late 1880s at the earliest.  From the heel style to the side seam to the toe shape (very round).  They are consistent with turn of the century shoe fashions.  The shoes also have "speed laces" which don't commonly appear until the early 1890s.  

The man on the right looks like he is wearing elastic side "congress gaiters" pattern shoes but there is not enough detail.  That pattern does predate the ACW.  Even then, if there was more detail, the cut of the shoes could give a closer date.

I've been "out of the game" for a while on historical fashion but I am usually within about 10 years on photos by clothing, pre 1900.

The very baggy and short cut britches they are wearing look like 1920s cut.  The baggy pants of the ACW were cut different with a taper to the cuff. Pre war pants tend to be tight to the knee (similar to bell bottoms), a fashion that comes back in the 1870s.

Hair also tends to be longer before the 1870s and by the 1880s 'high and tight" is the style.  These are very general rules and fashion swings with popular culture and generations. Oscar Wilde had a huge impact on fashion that reached even the most remote areas of the US.

Clothing is a pretty consistent way to date photos pre dry cleaning and laundry machines.  Most people would replace their suits relatively often as they would wear out.  It is obviously impossible to know how many suits these guys had or how in tune with trends they were.

A few challenges arise with this photo.  The subjects give the impression that they are not well off so they are likely wearing off the rack, second hand, or homemade (but not the shoes which seem to be up to date).  The short hair could be explained by a recent bout of lice or stay in jail/ prison. If for some completely random reason the photo did happen to date from the depression all bets are off on fashion as people wore anything they could get their hands on.

The biggest challenge is that the quality of the image is very poor and damaged.  That is why it is inconclusive for me.

I am still not sure what to make of the banjo.  With the low level of detail it could be anything including some sort of occupational tool that we don't know about.  Since we look for banjos that is what we see.  I don't believe that is the case, and I think this is a banjo of some type, I just don't know enough about mountain banjos or all the homemade "flour sieve with a pine neck" banjos to make an educated conclusion. 

---

If the banjo could be a prop, couldn't also the period clothing be for show? I mean, I've seen where I could get an old-timey tin type. "Step right up, folks, and step back in time!"

G Edward Porgie - Posted - 09/08/2017:  12:29:48

quote:

---

Originally posted by IMBanjoJim

 

Would it be possible to get a higher res scan of the photo? 72 DPI images never have the detail.

---

I higher resolution image might help, but in the case of this photo, it might only emphasize the splotches and age-related defects.

IMBanjoJim - Posted - 09/08/2017:  12:40:00

quote:

---

Originally posted by G Edward Porgie

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IMBanjoJim

 

Would it be possible to get a higher res scan of the photo? 72 DPI images never have the detail.

---

I higher resolution image might help, but in the case of this photo, it might only emphasize the splotches and age-related defects.

---

I used to do digital restoration of heirloom photos for a living. I found that many times you could get rid of the hazy bluish areas by scanning the original as a color image, eliminating the blue channel and then making the image black and white. Also, playing around in Levels can give you more contrast. I have a cheaper home version of Photoshop now, but it is still possible to bring out detail.

Mileage varies, of course--depends on the image.