One thing strange with the two picture versions - directly behind the chimney, on the horizon, an extra building has appeared, attached to the windmill! Are these two seperate touch ups of the same picture - was the windmill added to both of them or is the sepia one dated? The sepia one is an outstanding photograph if it predates 1878.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
One thing strange with the two picture versions - directly behind the chimney, on the horizon, an extra building has appeared, attached to the windmill! Are these two seperate touch ups of the same picture - was the windmill added to both of them or is the sepia one dated? The sepia one is an outstanding photograph if it predates 1878.
The sepia "original" photo had been stuck into a book in 1949 using five blobs of glue on the reverse. This has affected the image by bleaching the colour. The clearest indication of this is in the top corners - circles of white (if you have a laptop or LCD monitor, tilt the screen - they become very clear). The central blob of glue is where the 'extra' building and the windmill platform's handrail should be - both have disappeared. Where the building should be there remains only a small smudge of colour. The end of the mill's sweep has almost disappeared. It wasn't me who took the photo (obviously) but my conclusions are that both images are from the same negative/plate; the 'extra' building was on both images and has bleached from the sepia one; the water has been painted on to the b/w image to hide the debris and make a 'nice' scene of rural industry. Other opinions welcome.
This is curious isn't it Greasby, I can now see the bleaching you are talking about but in that case the chimney must be built of stronger stuff as it has stubbornly refused to be bleached despite the building being perfectly cut-off either side of it.
I think you may find that the sail has been bleached, the missing building is the start of some touching up. I still trying to figure out if the windmill has been added to the picture.
Trying to dig out the earliest picture without the windmill to see if there are any alterations to the other buildings which may show if the windmill is in the wrong era.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Thanks upton - first looks and the 1903 buildings are more dilapidated than the 1900 which is the right way round .... examples being, both single storey buildings in front of the chimney, windows on main mill building.
The counter arguement is the amount of plant growth, which is why the pictures need a closer look.
I will sit down sometime with all photos and look for more structural evidence.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Bromborough watermill is a favourite subject of mine. Here's a photo taken in April 1949 during the demolition of the buildings. Many history books give the date of demolition wrongly as 1959.
