Historical Sightings says they have not found a photograph from before the battery. People reply with paintings, which are a different kind of thing.
I want to separate the claim that a picture is old from the claim that it shows an independent encounter. A date printed under a later reproduction does not establish either on its own.
Historical Sightings says they have not found a photograph from before the battery. People reply with paintings, which are a different kind of thing.
I want to separate the claim that a picture is old from the claim that it shows an independent encounter. A date printed under a later reproduction does not establish either on its own.
−+Collapse or expand reply by nailbrush
Before photography would give you no photographs of anything. The question has to include which battery and which photographic process.
−+Collapse or expand reply by rustred
The section says battery, not photography. That difference is exactly why the cutoff interests me.
−+Collapse or expand reply by halfstep
A painting is still not the requested photograph. I am not saying a date under a painting is worthless; I am saying it answers something else.
−+Collapse or expand reply by windowseat
I would take an old street picture more seriously than another animal portrait commissioned to show an animal.
−+Collapse or expand reply by moth
There are photographs after batteries. That is the part I keep coming back to.
−+Collapse or expand reply by marl
An old photograph can also have been commissioned. You need the history of the picture, not just a year in the filename.