Edison doll and the danger of the Internet

[TinfoilPhono]

Over 8 years ago, when I first started dabbling in 19th century wet plate collodion photography, I made a number of tintypes of phonographs in my collection, notably this one of my Edison doll:



That was one of my very first. I was surprised how well it came out, in terms of lighting and focus, using an 1870s 'Petzval' lens which has a very shallow depth of field. The edges of the image show a lot more flaws that I consider acceptable today. To some extent that's inherent to the process but with practice I make far 'cleaner' images now. There are many people who embrace such flaws and actually strive for as many as possible in the erroneous belief that it makes the images more 'authentic'. They're not. No self-respecting 19th century photographer would put out images like many I see today. (Edge flaws were hidden by metal or paper mats.)

But I digress, this rant isn't about the wet plate process.

I posted that image on my collection website, identified as a tintype I had made in modern times. I have come to regret having posted it because it has since been appropriated without permission by many people, some of who imply that it's an original picture from 1890. It's all over Twitter and Pinterest, it seems. But the horses are long gone so closing the barn door now won't make much difference. I haven't taken it down.

This topic came up again this week when I received an email from a collector who was trying to research the proper dress for an Edison doll. He sent me a scan from a book, showing a doll. I recognized where it came from -- the Rolf's excellent book on phonograph dolls and toys. And I certainly recognized the doll since it was my own. He also sent a small copy of my tintype. His question was as follows:

- The dress in blue (picture number 1) is it a replica from a original talking doll (2?).

Oh dear. I can see why he was confused. If the tintype were original, then the one on my doll must have been reproduced based on that.........

I set him straight on that but now I wonder how many other people might be looking to make reproductions of that (non-original) dress based on my (seemingly original) tintype???

[martinola]

Rene -
That's a great photo. Yes, people can be fooled, but a rule of this "age of information" should always be is this genuine? (or true?) Some digging will finally turn up the right answer (like here, for instance).

Regards,
Martin

[gramophone-georg]

Rene- Maybe you should ask 'Snopes' to put up the facts about your photo. It's very convincing, though. Nice work.

[bigshot]

Put a cell phone in the corner of the picture next time. Imagine the time travel theories you'll generate!

[audiophile102]

Using multiple watermarks on an image that includes a copy write mark is pretty effective to prevent theft. There are excellent examples on Ebay. Here is one that would be really hard to steal. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1934-Linda-Leed ... SwB09YFApS

[bigshot]

That's also a great way to make a nice picture look like a billboard crossed with a legal writ.