http://www.blog4history.com/2009/03/possible-civil-war-soldier-tintype/ Tue, 27 Dec 2011 05:26:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 http://www.blog4history.com/2009/03/possible-civil-war-soldier-tintype/comment-page-1/#comment-15290 callie Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:38:45 +0000 http://www.blog4history.com/?p=548#comment-15290 yes, i agree-the fact that it's a tintype means nothing-i have many tintypes taken as late as 1898, some perhaps later-many photographers continued to use tintype as their primary method of photography even though more modern methods were in use elsewhere. -akin to some companies that use older forms of printing, production or whatnot even though they became archaic 20 years ago just because they have the equipment and are used to the methods. yes, i agree-the fact that it’s a tintype means nothing-i have many tintypes taken as late as 1898, some perhaps later-many photographers continued to use tintype as their primary method of photography even though more modern methods were in use elsewhere. -akin to some companies that use older forms of printing, production or whatnot even though they became archaic 20 years ago just because they have the equipment and are used to the methods.

]]> http://www.blog4history.com/2009/03/possible-civil-war-soldier-tintype/comment-page-1/#comment-8676 Sam Sun, 22 Mar 2009 04:34:02 +0000 http://www.blog4history.com/?p=548#comment-8676 That's true, and I don't see anything there to suggest this guy is a soldier. That’s true, and I don’t see anything there to suggest this guy is a soldier.

]]> http://www.blog4history.com/2009/03/possible-civil-war-soldier-tintype/comment-page-1/#comment-8675 Will Hickox Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:22:53 +0000 http://www.blog4history.com/?p=548#comment-8675 I can tell you exactly why the seller thinks it's Civil War era: CW photos command far greater prices than generic 19th century images. I can tell you exactly why the seller thinks it’s Civil War era: CW photos command far greater prices than generic 19th century images.

]]>