Jump to content


When the heck are these pictures from?

Started by Adam Townsend , Jan 05 2007 12:02 PM

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Adam Townsend

Adam Townsend
  • Members
    • Member ID: 101
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pulaski NY

Posted 05 January 2007 - 12:02 PM

I've had these 2 pictures for as long as I can remember, both are dated 1947 on the back (by the photo service company), but the man seems to be wearing a WW1 uniform. The only problem is... the collar isn't from any WW1 uniform I've seen.

Does anyone have ANY clues about these pictures?

Thank you,
Adam

Attached Images

  • picture.jpg


#2 Adam Townsend

Adam Townsend
  • Members
    • Member ID: 101
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pulaski NY

Posted 05 January 2007 - 12:03 PM

and the other

Attached Images

  • picture2.jpg


#3 BEAST

BEAST
  • Members
    • Member ID: 203
  • 9,495 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:INDIANA

Posted 05 January 2007 - 01:09 PM

It looks like it is his shirt collar.

#4 Adam Townsend

Adam Townsend
  • Members
    • Member ID: 101
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pulaski NY

Posted 05 January 2007 - 01:36 PM

It looks like it is his shirt collar.


Was it a common practice to have it outside of the tunic like that?

Adam

#5 US CANTEEN GURU

US CANTEEN GURU

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 85
  • 266 posts

Posted 05 January 2007 - 02:12 PM

Was it a common practice to have it outside of the tunic like that?

Adam


It was not regulation to wear the service COAT insignia on the shirt collar. I have seen this in quite a few pictures and my assumption is that the soldiers were allowed to remove their coats for exterior work and training, but the local commands wanted them to show their unit identification. This simple temorary wear of the shirt collar over the coat collar avoided changing the collar disks from coat to shirt collar and back. I have examined images of officers with their shirt collar out over their coat collar and it shows up in photo images often enough that it could be called a "common" practice.

#6 jim2

jim2
  • Members
    • Member ID: 100
  • 1,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:new jersey

Posted 05 January 2007 - 03:31 PM

I believe another reason that it was done was to prevent the itching that thr jacket collar caused.

#7 Adam Townsend

Adam Townsend
  • Members
    • Member ID: 101
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pulaski NY

Posted 05 January 2007 - 04:21 PM

So, chances are these are photos of a WW1 soldier that weren't developed until 1947?

Adam

#8 US CANTEEN GURU

US CANTEEN GURU

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 85
  • 266 posts

Posted 05 January 2007 - 04:32 PM

The photos were taken circa 1918-1926. I cannot imagine the unprocessed negatives holding up over 20 years. Perhaps the film was processed at the time exposed and these two prints printed in 1947.

#9 Dirk

Dirk

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 171
  • 2,856 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 January 2007 - 02:12 PM

Any chance the "4" is really a poorly written "1". Then 1917 would fit well for these pictures...the finish on the pictures does really looks WWI period to me.

#10 Adam Townsend

Adam Townsend
  • Members
    • Member ID: 101
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pulaski NY

Posted 06 January 2007 - 04:35 PM

They're definitely marked 1947, I'm sure they're just prints of WW1 photos, as was stated.

Thanks for your help everyone!

Adam


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


In Memory of Co-Founder GREG MILLS ROBINSON, a.k.a. "Marine-KaBar"
(February 17, 1949 - March 5, 2011)