Steven Hall
Member
The montage below includes the listed 6 images.
fig.1/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1712.- taken Sept 1911 @ outfitting
fig 2/ UFTM, image plate, Courtney No 6 - taken 10 / April / 1912
fig 3/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1561 - May 1911 pre-launch
fig 4/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1561a - May 1911 pre-launch
fig 5/ H/W.- UFTM, frame H-1559 - May 1911 pre-launch. (sepia tone)
fig 6/ H/W.- UFTM, frame H-1559 - May 1911 pre-launch.
There are 8 additional images (pre-launch) that show the area in discussion, unfortunately the image quality negates any high resolution capture of the ships name.
Fig 1 shows what appears to be the ships name on a single plate. (keeping everything simple) There appears some warranted attention surrounding the letter C in the singular. There does appear a hint that the letter itself could be contained within single block. After looking closer at the image — it appears to be the only one with that apparent affliction. I had both a 20” x 16” inch copy and the smaller 10” x 8” version to work with; neither held any greater advantage over the other. Unfortunately the image (‘s) starts to break down beyond a resolution above 600 dpi. So what’s seen below is arguably best I can produce.
The image thankfully provides the proportionate spacing based on the letters being (known to be) 18” inches in height. Thereby with reasonable confidence those figures (or letter spacing distribution figures) can be projected onto the pre-launch images.
Are the letters raised or incised is an open-ender — having been previously discussed.
The beauty of the image is that it provides all of the above information.
Fig 3 appears to have the letter spacing aligned to fig 1. I have to admit that the individual that painted, scratched or etched this plate may simple have been working on the above proportions (seen in fig 1) when he / she did the adjustment to the glass negative. The question is; when this was done was there visible letters on the plate to work with.
I cannot 100% confirm seeing any real evidence of any original (incised) letters beneath this individuals handy work.
The spacing (& size of the painted on letters) looks to have the correct proportions and alignment with fig 1. The two visible portholes seen above additionally support this.
Fig 4 is as above, just another photograph taken slightly (as long as it took to insert another plate in his camera) a short period later. Both full views of this image have been captured from (approx) the same location. I dare say that Robert J. Welsh must have had some concern with the capture of the first exposure. (by the length of the slightly extended shadows some several minutes must have expired been the two photographs.
[more later]
fig.1/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1712.- taken Sept 1911 @ outfitting
fig 2/ UFTM, image plate, Courtney No 6 - taken 10 / April / 1912
fig 3/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1561 - May 1911 pre-launch
fig 4/ H/W — UFTM, frame H-1561a - May 1911 pre-launch
fig 5/ H/W.- UFTM, frame H-1559 - May 1911 pre-launch. (sepia tone)
fig 6/ H/W.- UFTM, frame H-1559 - May 1911 pre-launch.
There are 8 additional images (pre-launch) that show the area in discussion, unfortunately the image quality negates any high resolution capture of the ships name.
Fig 1 shows what appears to be the ships name on a single plate. (keeping everything simple) There appears some warranted attention surrounding the letter C in the singular. There does appear a hint that the letter itself could be contained within single block. After looking closer at the image — it appears to be the only one with that apparent affliction. I had both a 20” x 16” inch copy and the smaller 10” x 8” version to work with; neither held any greater advantage over the other. Unfortunately the image (‘s) starts to break down beyond a resolution above 600 dpi. So what’s seen below is arguably best I can produce.
The image thankfully provides the proportionate spacing based on the letters being (known to be) 18” inches in height. Thereby with reasonable confidence those figures (or letter spacing distribution figures) can be projected onto the pre-launch images.
Are the letters raised or incised is an open-ender — having been previously discussed.
The beauty of the image is that it provides all of the above information.
Fig 3 appears to have the letter spacing aligned to fig 1. I have to admit that the individual that painted, scratched or etched this plate may simple have been working on the above proportions (seen in fig 1) when he / she did the adjustment to the glass negative. The question is; when this was done was there visible letters on the plate to work with.
I cannot 100% confirm seeing any real evidence of any original (incised) letters beneath this individuals handy work.
The spacing (& size of the painted on letters) looks to have the correct proportions and alignment with fig 1. The two visible portholes seen above additionally support this.
Fig 4 is as above, just another photograph taken slightly (as long as it took to insert another plate in his camera) a short period later. Both full views of this image have been captured from (approx) the same location. I dare say that Robert J. Welsh must have had some concern with the capture of the first exposure. (by the length of the slightly extended shadows some several minutes must have expired been the two photographs.
[more later]