Topic: Man sitting by Preacher while everyone else stands- 1920s-(Patton?)

[jpeters609]

Is it just me, or is it starting to feel like Antonioni's "Blow Up" in here?

[misterjones]

Great movie.  I have it on DVD.

I already tried the CTRL + and it doesn't help much.  I was thinking more along the lines of changing brightness, contrast, sharpness, etc.  I will try it on Photoshop, but I have the feeling that it will raise more questions than it will possibly answer.

Personally, I think the photo is just a wedding picture taken in the rural south about 80 years ago that includes no one famous and we are all driving ourselves crazy trying to prove the impossible-to-prove.

[Mr.OMuck]

Well excuse me for demurring but I actually spent a good deal of time on trying to get a clear image of the seated man's right ear which I provided a tracing of below. I also provided a tracing of Patton's ear from his Paramount photo. You can now scroll down and reference the image. It proves fairly conclusively that the seated man is NOT PATTON. Ear shape is an established means of determining identity no less accurate than fingerprints. Its as though I hadn't posted it at all. Is anybody here actually interested in real evidence or just in flogging a dead horse?

[Stumblin]

Mr. O'Muck, were my ancient computer capable of such subtle and complex operations, I would gladly render your ear sketches into some new-fangled digital overlay format in conjunction with the appropriate photographs. Unfortunately, I can't do it. Hopefully, someone else will.
Having said that, I think I ought, respectfully, to submit, by way of anecdotal testimony, that I have been unable to avoid noticing, to my lasting chagrin, the changing shapes of my own ears over the last two decades.

[Mr.OMuck]

Size of ears yes, shape no.

[uncle bud]

The ears have it!

[Stumblin]

It only remains for me to say that were you to be made an earl and subsequently to be awarded an OBE, you would be an earlobe.

[Rivers]

At this point I for one am not trying to prove anything. For me it's all about getting as much information out of the picture as possible.

Speculation doesn't prove anything, but pointing out observable facts may lead to other findings and/or be a basis for more research.

The print itself would make a fine jigsaw puzzle.

I thought you were joking about the ears, btw. Somebody go ahead and produce an animated GIF with the ears overlayed, flashing on and off... 

[dj]

Size of ears yes, shape no.

And hairiness.  At the risk of telling you all much more than you want to know, it does seem that all the hair that's left the top of my head over the years has taken up residence in my ears.   

Is anybody here actually interested in real evidence or just in flogging a dead horse?

I think you know where I stand on that, O'Muck.

Now where'd I put that horse?   

[misterjones]

I will try it on Photoshop, but I have the feeling that it will raise more questions than it will possibly answer.

Amazingly, it reads:  "The seated guy to my right is Charley Patton."

Saw that one coming up the Mississippi River, I suspect.

Actually, the top word could be "Sacred".  I have no guess about the bottom word.

[bnemerov]

"Is anybody here interested in real evidence......?" [amen, Mr. O'Muck]

Repeating my post of way too many pages ago: Randy, why don't you go to the village and show the picture to someone who KNOWS what and who are portrayed in the image?



best,
bruce

[Randy Meadows]

Can ya'll sign your name to your posts?

So I can read some of ya'lls work... and provide feedback..
Everyone seems so perfect here I just wanna see for myself...

[Slack]

Randy,

Folks do not have to sign their names to their posts, although some do.  For you to demand that they do, sounds threatening - which we don't do around here. 

If you make unsubstantiated claims, folks will without a doubt, question them.  If you start getting defensive about your unsubstantiated claims, then you are taking yourself way too seriously.  Which of course is not what we do around here either.  You might review what we're about:

http://weeniecampbell.com/yabbse/index.php?page=page4243

Thanks.

[misterjones]

Repeating my post of way too many pages ago: Randy, why don't you go to the village and show the picture to someone who KNOWS what and who are portrayed in the image?

I guess my imperfection is that I have not fully read (let alone analyzed) all of the posts here.  If it is known where the photo was taken and someone has access to that location, it indeed would seem that now is the time for a little legwork.  I think that would be kind of fun.  Who knows what additional photos might turn up.  Hell, tell me and I'll go there.

[Randy Meadows]

I just wanted to know the source of the critic 
Thats fair.. 
But slack, If I was a betting man Id bet that you have never even set foot in mississippi.