1890s (?) Colorado/New Mexico range photos

[LongWalker]

Just ran across this, thought a few folks might find it interesting: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7103641/Wild-West-130-years-Incredible-unseen-pictures-British-farmhand-cowboys-work.html

[Rye Miles]

Cool!!! Thanks!

[RRio]

Great stuff. Thank you.   

[Advertising]

[DeaconKC]

Thank you!

[Trailrider]

Must be phony! None of those cowboys seem to be wearing guns! I thought they all went armed to the teeth!    Great stuff. Thanks, Pard!

[RRio]

Must be phony! None of those cowboys seem to be wearing guns! I thought they all went armed to the teeth!    Great stuff. Thanks, Pard!

They're all carrying concealed.   

[Professor Marvel]

These are wonderful images! Thanks for sharing!

But This is one of those "Antique Roadshow" moments where the "family story" doesn't match reality...

I highly doubt the info from The Daily Mail :

" taken by a British farmhand and show life on the ranches of Colorado and New Mexico in the US in the 1880s."
" thought to have been taken by a British farmhand who traveled across the US in the late 19th century to earn a living"
"The unnamed Brit who took the images would have documented his experience using these images which he collated into an album he bought home."

More likely, it was far later in the 1895-1905 time period, and more likely a well-off traveller who could afford
the expensive camera and film required.

Roll cameras were introduced by Kodak in 1888 but cost $50 to $100 until
the introduction of the Kodak "Ordinaries" in 1891.

The Kodak "A" Ordinary went for for $6 (2x3 inch negatives ) and $10 for the
"B" Ordinary (3.5 x 4 inch negatives) and $15 for the "C" Ordinary ( 4x5 negatives).

They had to be loaded in a darkroom and only carried enough film for about 20-25 images.

This is important, because the paper photographs were all made by "contact printing" - that is
laying the negative directly on the paper - no enlargers were in general use)

Also, these cameras has primitive lenses set typically at a fixed distance and slow shutters,
usually 1/25 of a second. These were far too slow to catch detailed images of the hard riding cowboys!

It was not until the No. 5 Folding Kodet (1895-1897) that users could buy a roll film camera
with a quality lens having a diaphragm range from f/8 to f/32 and adjustable shutter that
has speeds of 1/4, 1/25, 1/50 and 1/100 of a second ... all for $75.

1/100 of a second could finally catch action in bright sunlight.

The auctioneers did admit that "several"  (many?)  were professional photos...
so I suspect it is a motley collection of professional and a small collection of "snapshots"
that were most likely taken by a well-off traveller sometime after 1900 with one of the "better"
kodak rollfilm cameras .

Further, the entire Great SouthWest remained almost unchanged until after 1930-ish so it is entirely
possible the traveler did not arrive until even 1915 or 1920 .....

I also cast aspersions on their accuracy - the photo entitled
"With few roads, wagons were the main transportation method until the advent of the railway. Here a man is seen with two cart horses pulling a wagon"

is actually a team of 4 horses (not two) pulling a freight wagon (as opposed to a farm wagon or a cart) and were in common use in New Mexico,
Colorado, Arizona, Utah, and Nevada until about 1940's

thanks for playing!

your history debunker
Proif Marvel

[Kent Shootwell]

There Professor Marvel goes again clouding the subject with facts. Trying to live the fantasy gets harder with knowledge and many a man has been happier in ignorance!  I?m going to take my whiskey out to the porch and drown my sorrows.

[Professor Marvel]

There Professor Marvel goes again clouding the subject with facts. Trying to live the fantasy gets harder with knowledge and many a man has been happier in ignorance!  I?m going to take my whiskey out to the porch and drown my sorrows.

No Need for that my Good Kent!

The main point of my babbling is to debunk the "traveling farmhand photographer"  and dispell any fairy stories surrounding the photos.
The Hyperbole and Snake Oil is not surprising considering that the Daily Mail is another Tabloid much like the National Enquirer


The images are valid easily up to 1920ish of the Real West. if one checks into the Art Colonies of Sante Fe and Taos
one finds nearly identical photos right up too ~ 1920

re: The Taos Society of Artists was an organization of visual arts founded in Taos, New Mexico in 1915; it disbanded in 1927

If one looks into the history of the "Indian Country" as the AAA likes to call it, one finds that it was still incredibly
wild, rugged, untamed & etc until well after WW1

The entire Front and Back range of the Rockies - Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona
were accessible only by rail to major metropolitan areas and horse after that. Even after the Tin Lizzy , horses
were preferred due to the lack of infrastructure (roads)

Oklahoma and Texas and the Dakotas were quite open and quite wild for some time. The only available  law was the local or county LEO
and whatever vigilance committee the citizens could drum up, or appeal to the governor ( Ie Arizona and Texas Rangers)
or the Fed for one of the very few Fedral Marshalls.

The Huge OIl Boom in Oklahoma and Texas made those places even wilder and crazier. Bass Reeves worked as a LEO OK and AR up
till 1909. Any photos of that time and country differ only in Oil derecks and autos. Take a photo away from the Oil Rigs and you
still see Cowboys and Ranchers just like 1880.

your humble babbler
prof marvel