User talk:Colin Douglas Howell
More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.
|(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)|
TUSC token 95d94e260289510f279742d44030037aEdit
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
RuthAS's reply to my HB-IRW image query. (Moved from my user page.)Edit
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. INeverCry 21:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Peugeot type 4Edit
Thank you for clarifying the i.d. For many of us the difference between a Bey and a Shah and Tunis or Persia is of little consequence! Are you able to make a reference to some published source for this identification? If you can do that and add a note on the notes to the image that would be very welcome. Anyway, many thanks, 08:21, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Heh, all those Middle Eastern royal titles can be confusing! Personally my real concern was that a photo of a supposed Type 3 looked a hell of a lot like the Type 4, of which only one example was supposed to have been made! Unfortunately, I have no published source to go on. I could find no other example of this photo online which might clarify matters, nor could I find any other reference to the Shah of Persia getting a Peugeot in that period, though that could be a situation of "proving a negative". It's even possible that what I'm claiming to be a misidentification may have itself come from an erroneous printed source; not all authors do their homework thoroughly. I think the only sure way of getting this citeably clarified may be to ask Peugeot's Sochaux museum for help tracking down the source and context of the old photo.
- What struck me, however, was the remarkably close resemblance between the Type 4 in the Sochaux museum and the car shown in the photo. Inconveniently for us, none of our Commons images show the side of the Type 4 seen in the photo, but I did find a few non-free images of the Type 4 which do show that side: , , , . Older black-and-white photography can have different color sensitivities than modern color photography (see orthochromatic photography vs. panchromatic film): blue-hued areas tend to be lighter than red-hued ones, so shadings can look different. Despite this, the shapes of the markings, decoration patterns, and other car details in the old photo and the modern ones are completely identical. As far as I can see, the photo car and the Type 4 in Sochaux look almost exactly the same; the only differences (such as the rear tires, wheel hubs, and absence of a horn on the steering column) could be attributed to changes which took place during restoration for display. This identical decoration seems extremely unlikely if these were two separate cars custom-built for different monarchs, who generally aren't known for slavish imitation.
- One other thing strikes me about the old photo. At first I assumed it predated delivery (the source dates it as 1893), but then I noticed something in the middle right background. That object marked with the "Peugeot" logo looks like a truck, not from the early 1890s, but from a couple of decades later. (In fact, I think it may be carrying a car in its bed, mostly covered by a tarp, and if you look closely, both of those vehicles appear to have steering wheels.) The Bey of Tunis who received the Peugeot Type 4 died in 1902, and his heir only outlived him by a few years. The Type 4 obviously must have been returned to Peugeot somehow in order for it to end up in their museum, and I'm wondering whether this could have happened quite early, with this photo being taken around that time. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I should not have troubled you I should have looked and seen Wikimedia holds other photos of the car. I should think everything in your response is true. I'd guess the photo we talk about is out the back of the museum after redecorating the vehicle, don't you. I think the truck and its cargo are very old vehicles when photographed and my guess, no more than a guess, would be 1930s to 1950s for the date of the photo. Sorry I've caused you to risk getting sore fingers! Regards, Eddaido (talk) 20:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- No, it's no problem; I often tend to write detailed responses that try to cover all the bases. :) As for your ideas about where and when the photo was taken, the museum project didn't start until 1982 and it didn't open until 1988, so I'd assume these were Peugeot industrial facilities at the time. My own impression was that the truck was simply a Peugeot transport truck that happened to be in the shot, so I was thinking of a time frame closer to the 1910s or 1920s. I appreciate the quick reply. :) --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)