Color Question

[skamikaze]

What color do yo think the jackets are in this picture:

http://www.freewebs.com/tjkoehn/undefined/Knit%20sweater-1.jpg

They seem to be the same as the trousers, but lighter than the forage cap.

Thoughts? I know a lot of PA and NY state jackets were grey. The cut of the coat is not VRC, so that probably rules sky blue out. I know there are experts on this kind of thing out there.

[Craig L Barry]

Experts that can tell the color of something from a B&W pic?

[doughboy]

Not sure where you see them being lighter than the forage cap. They look the same to me. Definitely a NYS jacket.
Christopher

[Tom Scoufalos]

No, that photo has classically been attributed to a PA regiment in various texts, and is cited as the 31st PA/later 82nd PA on the LOC website. The odd thing is that other photographs with the same attribution show officers and noncoms (specifically an orderly sergeant) in presumeably dark blue coats, the orderly in a federal issue frock coat.

Note, the caption and attribution of the photo does not appear on the same page as the photo itself, but rather the link in the gallery that proginates it. You have to click on "Bibliographic information" for that.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?ils:5:./temp/~pp_8Q4G::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01667:@ @@

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?ils:1:./temp/~pp_8Q4G::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01666:@ @@mdb=cwp

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?ils:3:./temp/~pp_8Q4G::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01668:@ @@mdb=cwp

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?ils:4:./temp/~pp_8Q4G::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01663:@ @@mdb=cwp

I'm still digging...at present, flummoxed by the 31st/82nd comparison...the 31st PVI was the 2nd PRVC; how the 82nd links in yet I've not sorted out...

Ok, it seems that when the 2nd PVRC recieved its line number as the 31st PVI, what was at that point the 31st PVI became the 82nd, so that clears that up. Makes sense, too, since a digitized history of the 31st PVI/later 82nd PVI mentions their mustering in in August 1861 and serving in the defenses of Washington from October 1861 until March 9, 1862...with their camp at Queen's Farm, as attributed in the photographs above. Now we're gettin' somewhere; good thing one of my consults was a no-show!

[skamikaze]

Experts that can tell the color of something from a B&W pic?

Yep. certain colors turn up as different shades in B&W pics. I'm fairly colorblind as it is, so any help I can get with this would be cool. The wife and I plan on re-making the image this year.

Tom, those are great links buddy. The dress coats in the other picture don't match the shade of the shell jackets in the first photo. But again, I'm not the best with this kind of thing.

The caps look a shade darker to me, especially if you factor in the light beating down on the cap. it is better in the second pic of the couple. especially on the guys in the back

[Blair]

Tom,

This is good info, check out the guy wearing a Greatcoat(?) in the back ground on this image,
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...666:@@@mdb=cwp
This could give you an idea on how dark the uniforms might be in these lighting conditions when the image was taken.

[skamikaze]

hey Blair, that link didn't work for me. error 404?

[Blair]

Eric,

I have found different fabrics with differing texture may also appear slightly different in shade or color in these old black and white images too.

[doughboy]

This may be a PA unit though I would like to see some support for PA troops wearing jackets like that. An LOC attribution is no guarantee of anything, in fact the USGovt. has often put wrong information with photos you are talking about clerks not historians. They catalog onlywhat they are given. (My wife is a librarian at the Smithsonian).
I still think this is a dark issue as the comparison with the greatcoat in the background would seem to support.
Christopher Wilson

[Blair]

Eric,

Try this one,
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?ils:1:./temp/~pp_8Q4G::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01666:@ @@mdb=cwp

It is the second image from the top in Tom's posting....

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

It must be the satanic "666" embedded in the line. The link does not for me either.

;)

Yes, one should not use modern B & W film as a basis for CW era orthochromatic images as different emulsions are sensitive to only certain wave lengths of light.
For example, one might not be activated by say red and and as a result the image will have its red items appear black.
Or blues appear as shades of gray.

CHS

(Black and white are not colors. They are either the absence of all color, or the presence of all color. ;) :) )

[Blair]

Curt,

Then you too may want to try this instead,
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...666:@@@mdb=cwp
Sorry, I Can't help the 666 whatever it is you wish to tag it with


Whether there is an absent or presents of light, black and white are indeed colors.

[toccoa42]

This could give you an idea on how dark the uniforms might be in these lighting conditions when the image was taken.

Not necessarily.

First of all, the photo referenced in the original post is a wet plate collodian image, not black and white, technically, as modern photographers refer to them. The emulsion on both react differently to the intensity and wavelengths of light, not the actual shades of the cloth as affected by the lighting condition itself. Thus the overcoat referened earlier, likely a light blue kersey, will frequently appear lighter, even almost white, in a collodian image than a black and white one, where the light blue will be a shade of light gray. That's why sky blue trousers on Union soldiers in collodion images will vary so much in shade; it depends on the intensity and wavelength of light, not the actual shade of the fabric itself.

Virginia Mescher of the Ragged Soldier Sutlery researched this phenomonon in wet plate photography and wrote an excellent article about it, accessed here:

http://www.raggedsoldier.com/photo_article.pdf

Excerpted from that article:

"Photographers used various techniques to achieve different photographic effects, but there was one effect that could not be changed; much of the shading was caused by differences in the intensity of the light. However, in the wet plate photographic process, the shade of the photographed object was also affected by the sensitivity of the chemicals on the plate to the relative intensity of different wavelengths of light. Because of the different reactions of various wavelengths, in period photographs warm yellows, reds, and oranges usually show up black; but other cool yellows close to a blue light source show up as a light color. New yellow pine boards show up dark. Blond hair often will appear a dull black as do freckles and red hair. Tan tones (including tanned faces) show up as dark gray. In a reversal of expected shades, pale pink can show up as a darker shade than dark pink. Although green contains blue pigment mixed with yellow, greens lose most shading and show up as either dark gray or black. White, due to a peculiar reaction of the chemicals to the relatively intense light, can show up white or a shade of grey. Black wool photographs as gray, and gray wool, because of the blue component in gray dye, photographs as white. Blue to violet can show up anywhere from white to varying shades of gray depending on the shade of blue or violet, with the lighter shades being almost white in the photograph. Blue eyes appear as white and skin tones, due to the yellow, amber, and red shades common to most skin types, will appear at least two tones darker in shade than we would expect."

Thus it is possible that the little girl's dress in the photo could be blue, or white; that the washerwoman's sweater could be either red, or yellow, as well as a dark gray; and the soldiers' jackets could be dark gray, or a blue-black wool.

So the fact is, we really will not know the color of things, given wet plate photography. We have to rely on historical documentation.

Give the article a read, it's very informative.

[skamikaze]

This may be a PA unit though I would like to see some support for PA troops wearing jackets like that.

Don't know if you have it, but page 153 of Echos of Glory, Arms and Equipment of the Union has what is roughly the exact same coat, grey of course. The only difference is there is no slash pocket on the one in EOG, but that is likely a personal alteration.

[Tom Scoufalos]

Here is the blowup of the overcoat dude, as well as some closeups of the jacket.


This may be a PA unit though I would like to see some support for PA troops wearing jackets like that.


While I do not own a personal hard copy and cannot refer anyone to a digitized one, Michael Winey's book "Pennsylvanians in Gray" talks about early war issued roundabouts and jackets.

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Thanks for the second effort, but that link was flawed as well and would not open.

CHS
Additive and Subtractive Color Mess
Light Color versus Pigment/Dye Rifles

[Blair]

Curt,

It is the original posting by Tom Scoufalos. Look under the second image file and the forth for a comparison.
For some reason I am unable to copy and paste that posting here????

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Thanks, Herr Blair.

CHS

[jda3rd]

In wet plate photography, the emulsion is sensitive in the ultra-violet and some of the green bits of the spectrum. Over on the photography area of the board, some one posted a wet plate image of a color chart that had very little relationship to an identical image made on modern black and white film. Dye lots, materials, any number of factors can influence how UV is reflected and captured on a collodion image. I have a tintype of a USCT soldier, whose frock coat looks gray, his kepi looks black ,and his trousers look almost white. I'll post it sometime, so y'all can see the differences.

Frank

[mmescher]

If you go to our website as Lynn Kessler suggested, one of the features is a comparison of images where we show a color picture, a wet plate, and a modern black and white. The differences are striking, especially with some of the blues.

Just as an aside, there are a lot of other interesting articles on the website that are useful for soldiers as well as civilians. Go to raggedsoldier.com and click on the menu item for "Articles: Virginia's Veranda" and look at the feature article as well as the archived titles. There are articles on lighting, summer beverages that can replace gatorade in a tin cup, the article on photography, and literacy and reading (a pet peeve of mine is the number of reenacting soldiers who profess lack of literacy. Most states had literacy rates better than today and to portray them as illiterate is an insult to them.)

Go to the site and have fun!

Michael Mescher