I think this is a drawing, another thinks it is a phot

Question

https://archive.org/stream/averysofgrotonge00swee#page/14/mode/2up

I thought this was a drawing - likely charcoal. Another thinks it is a photo. The source does not identify the medium. Other issues, but this needs to be resolved first.

Comments

In my opinion, the specific source of the image (of James sitting in a chair) may be a photo of a painting (perhaps he sat for a portrait). Given that he lived in the 17th century, the original medium for the image is unlikely to have been a photo.

---

Just to be clear and avoid ambiguities, are you speaking of the unidentified original work? Or the printed book? or the digitally scanned archive of the book? Because technically, what you're looking at is a digital photo of a halftone printed image of a photograph of a likely drawing or painting.

---

Oh wow. Well that really helps.  Two others thought it was not that James Avery because it was a photo. I never saw it as a photo (but have low-vision so what I think might be questionable.)  So next to determine if it is that James Avery;

---

Yes, Dennis, that is part of my point.

I also wanted to clarify that I was seeing the correct image - that we were, so to speak, on the same page!

---

I believe the original was a photograph.

Answer 1

I disagree. This is very clearly a photograph, just not of the James Avery of the 1600s. Look at the clothing. That is not the way men of the 1600s dressed. It appears to me to be a photo of a gentleman from the late 1800s. It is also the way people posed for portrait photos at that time. A quick perusal of the book shows a couple of James Averys born in the 1800s, either one of which could be this man.;

Comments

Jim makes a very valid point. It might be an image of a different James Avery of a different time, than the one implied by the context of the facing page.

---

Well that is the next question. I figured if it was in fact a photograph it was definitely not that James Avery. So now I will search for other images of other James Averys and see if any seem a good match.

---

I always think the achievements of the early pioneers are amazing, considering they had no suitable clothing.

Sir Walter Raleigh (think doublets and codpieces) failed as a colonist, but the Mayflower was only 35 years behind.  It was mostly knee-breeches and hose by then, until pantaloons came in.

And no lapels - everything fastened up to the neck.

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/photos/english-civil-war?sort=mostpopular&mediatype=photography&phrase=english%20civil%20war#license

(Mostly artists' impressions painted much later - too many trousers)

Answer 2

Photography came out in the 1830's, so it's unlikely that it's a photograph.

Comments

Doh, you beat me, Frank!

Guess that's why you're an Astronaut!!

---

We may be Jones cousins. My most recent Jones is Jane, born Chilmark, Martha's Vineyard in 1753.

It goes, Jane, Ebenezer, Thomas, John, Abraham (England) Thomas and Joseph.

Answer 3

It appears to be a photo, but I'm doubtful about the subject. Photography didn't exist during James' lifetime, and the clothing in the portrait appears more modern than what he would have worn.

Comments

I agree. I don't believe the subject of the photo is from the 1600s.

Answer 4

I removed the image from the profile (6 years later!), but I added research notes and a link to the image.  Removing the profile link unfortunately changes the privacy settings, so now only a thumbnail is available.  But the book it comes from is available only online. Both are still available for people to see.

Comments

Unless the image is attached to at least one open page / profile, you have just marked it for deletion in about 20 to 30 days.
if you wish to retain it for people to see (as you say you linked to it), might I suggest you add Space:NoDoubleVision to it.  (Although, if you did not originally upload the image, it may need higher level intervention.)

---

That's good to know.  I just added a link to the original image in the book it came from.  I think in this case it's fine for it to be deleted.  It wasn't appropriate to be attached to the profile.

Answer 5

It could not possibly be a photograph of James Avery. Photography was only invented 150 years after he died. There is in fact something fishy about it since the clothing looks a lot more like second half of the nineteenth century.