--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, Pamm Garber <in_genealogist@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks for that explanation. I have several photos of boys in
dresses. My mother-in-law who is 77 still has a dress that her father
used to wear. How she managed to keep it looking good all these years,
I'll never know!
> Pamm
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
> (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

http://www.rootsweb.com/~txnavarr/photos/goat_photos.htm

Thanks! I enjoyed looking at those.  You should have let your dad get you a
goat!  (grin)

I see this was still popular up into the 1930s.  I'll find the one I have and
post it.

Christine


--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "Cecelia" <cheinric@...> wrote:
>
> If you go to the photos section of the Navarro county, Texas gen web site,
there are
some photos of children in goat wagons.

Can someone tell me the difference between storing pictures on CD vs. DVD?  I
know the DVD will hold more pictures.  But does it affect quality, or longevity?
Why would I choose one over the other?  My old desktop computer, (upgraded to
WIN98) will not write to either, but will read a CD.  Does that mean it would
not read a DVD?  I have a newer laptop which will read/write to both.
I realize these questions are probably elementary, but I've asked several folks
and no one yet has been able to answer my questions.
Thanks,
Pat Baber
   ----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/711 - Release Date: 3/5/07 9:41 AM


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,
i am frm PUNE INDIA , which was HQ of British Army in 1818 .
also we have few war memorials of first & second world war
i am intrested in old photos of my city,i have been working on Pune
city , history for last 8 years,if any one want any of about Pune ,pls
mail
Mandar Lawate

> Can someone tell me the difference between storing pictures
> on CD vs. DVD?  I know the DVD will hold more pictures.  But
> does it affect quality, or longevity?

It depends on which type of CD or DVD you buy.  Some DVDs will probably last
longer than cheap CDs.  However, while I know there are "archival" CDs,
which *supposedly* last 300 years, I don't think that there are any DVD
equivalents yet.  However, the other thing to consider is the *useful* life
of the media.  Say, for instance, that back in the days of floppy disks,
they had made ones designed to last 300 years.  It wouldn't matter at this
point, because few people have the hardware to read them anymore.  I
personally use the archival CDs, but every few years I intend to a) refresh
the media as necessary throughout the years and b) if a media change is not
necessary, test the accessibility of the files.  If you are interested in
reading more about archival CDs, here is an interesting link:
<http://www.silverace.com/dottyspotty/issue12.html>.

> Why would I choose one
> over the other?  My old desktop computer, (upgraded to WIN98)
> will not write to either, but will read a CD.  Does that mean
> it would not read a DVD?

Correct, a CD player will not read a DVD, but DVD players will read CDs.

HTH,
Andi Windham

Hello:

I would appreciate hearing from any one may the have infornmation on finding US
Navy photographs from WWII. I am particularily interestred in the 91st. CB
Battalion that served in the Pacific from 194r3 to 1943.

   Thank you,
   Harry W. Short

   We can connect at hdmshort@...



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq22-1.htm    This is the archives at
the (former) Naval Photographic Center, NAS Anacostia, Washington,
D.C.    Evan

HDM SHORT wrote:

> Hello:
>
> I would appreciate hearing from any one may the have infornmation on
> finding US Navy photographs from WWII. I am particularily interestred
> in the 91st. CB Battalion that served in the Pacific from 194r3 to 1943.
>
> Thank you,
> Harry W. Short
>
> We can connect at hdmshort@... <mailto:hdmshort%40sbcglobal.net>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

Try www.usni.org - the US Naval Institute. They have a huge collection
of photographs - they are usually not free but the cost is not that
large - possibly depending on the usage.

Carroll Hughes

>
> HDM SHORT wrote:
>
> > Hello:
> >
> > I would appreciate hearing from any one may the have infornmation on
> > finding US Navy photographs from WWII. I am particularily interestred
> > in the 91st. CB Battalion that served in the Pacific from 194r3 to 1943.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Harry W. Short
> >
>
>
>

Hi,
I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
thanks for your time.
Barbara

I figured someone would have replied to this by now. Photography comes
under Signal Corps in the Army. If you google US Army Signal Corps you
should get a web page then look for photography then archives. I have a
cousin who served in the AF and I sent him a query, but haven't received
a reply yet.  Evan

tripp8908 wrote:

> Hi,
> I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
> wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
> Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
> thanks for your time.
> Barbara
>
>

Barbara, just got a reply from my cousin :
"There are a ton of websites around with Air Force historical photos and
artwork.  Not knowing what she may be looking for, specifically, I'd
first recommend a Google Image search.   Try Army Air Corps, or USAAF.
Also, go to www.af.mil -- under "art" there used to be a link to the Air
University's multimedia site in Montgomery; as well as a really
well-done location at Langley's Air Combat Command multimedia.  Can't
find those links in the current Air Force website, but the bases are
listed under "sites" on the tab at the top of the page.  If all else
fails, have her check in with our buddies at the Air Force Museum.
They've changed their website address--  www.nationalmuseum.af.mil. "
Hope this helps.  Evan

tripp8908 wrote:

> Hi,
> I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
> wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
> Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
> thanks for your time.
> Barbara
>
>

Here's a link that you maybe able to use...
http://www.linkpendium.com/
Pamm


---------------------------------
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

My sister has gotten some photos from an album that were "ripped out" of  the
album.  The black paper is still attached with some kind of paste that  is
very hard.  These photos were most likely put in the scrapbook in the  1920's or
1930s.

There are brush marks in the paste/glue so it most likely came in a  jar.

The photos are on standard photo paper of the time without the card  backing.

Any suggestions as to what techniques she might use to remove the  paste/glue
and what type of substance this might be??

Longtime lurker

Lisa  Harley
La Crescenta, CA




************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
  Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am finally getting to the point where I will be scanning my old photos in
order to share and preserve them.

I'm confused about what resolution to scan them for the best preservation,
without doing more than necessary.

Thanks!


Lisa  Harley
La Crescenta, CA



************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
  Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, LisaHBskt@... wrote:
>
> I am finally getting to the point where I will be scanning my old
photos in
> order to share and preserve them.
>
> I'm confused about what resolution to scan them for the best
preservation,
> without doing more than necessary.

I scan everything at 300 dpi and save as a .tif file.

If you scan at 300 dpi, you can take the image to a commercial
photofinisher and get the exact same size print that you scanned.  If
you want to be able to get larger prints, scan at a higher resolution.

I save as a .tif image, because the .jpg format is a "lossy" format
which means that it throws away detail that your eye can't see.  You
will also loose image quality every time you save a .jpg file for the
same reason.  There used to be a web site which showed that
degredation, but I think it went away.  :-(

susan

Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can see it.
Plus, the photos could be ruined.
   Harry

LisaHBskt@... wrote:
           My sister has gotten some photos from an album that were "ripped out"
of the
album. The black paper is still attached with some kind of paste that is
very hard. These photos were most likely put in the scrapbook in the 1920's or
1930s.

There are brush marks in the paste/glue so it most likely came in a jar.

The photos are on standard photo paper of the time without the card backing.

Any suggestions as to what techniques she might use to remove the paste/glue
and what type of substance this might be??

Longtime lurker

Lisa Harley
La Crescenta, CA

************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 3/28/2007 10:20:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
hdmshort@... writes:

Why  bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can see
it.  Plus, the photos could be ruined.
Harry

I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the back
which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album

Lisa Harley
La Crescenta, CA





************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
  Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lisa
   Maybe you can find some help to your problem at these sites. Or place the
photos back to back in archival plastic like pages. Or copy your photos with a
digital camera like I do and store the orginals in a pvc free boxes, etc.
   The State Library or Archives in Sacramento preserves many old photos etc.,
try to find them on the web. I can't find their site at the moment.
   Harry

Preserving Old Photos

  http://www.loc.gov/preserv/care/photolea.html

  http://www.loc.gov/preserv/

  http://www.scrapbookpreservationsociety.com/

  http://aic.stanford.edu/library/online/brochures/photos.html

  http://aic.stanford.edu/library/online/brochures/matt.html

  http://loricase.com/faq.html

  http://www.si.edu/mci/english/learn_more/taking_care/appraisal.html

  www.universityproducts.com


   http://vivisimo.com/

LisaHBskt@... wrote:
           In a message dated 3/28/2007 10:20:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
hdmshort@... writes:

Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can see
it. Plus, the photos could be ruined.
Harry

I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the back
which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album

Lisa Harley
La Crescenta, CA

************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Instead of trying to remove the paste from your pictures, you might just have
copies made of the pictures.  Or scan them and save, then print them.
You might take them to someone who does restoration work or a museum that does
preservation, and ask what to do, or if they can recommend someone.  They might
recognize the glue and be able to help.
I took some tin types to a photographer, who took pictures of them.  Then I had
them framed in antique-looking frames for my living room.  He gave me the
negatives so that, if something happens to the photos or if I want to give
copies to other people, I can have more made from the negative.  I tried to scan
the original tin types, but they are pretty dark.
I have pictures that I pulled out of old albums, too, and many have another
picture on the back.  I didn't want to risk tearing them, so I just labeled
them, then put them in an archival box, for now, after scanning them.  I printed
out the scans, and put the copies in plastic page covers in notebooks.  (I'm
making a notebook for each family, including printed material and stories I am
writing.) This is just a temporary sort of thing as I know the  plastic covers
are not good for the pictures.  But it works for taking around to people to look
at.  This allows me to add on, write on, move around, or whatever I need to do. 
I take them to show to others who might have information that we might share, as
well as to my aunt who is in a nursing home.
I have made quite a few copies on the computer of pictures to put up in my
aunt's room in the nursing home.  Some of the pictures belonged to her parents,
aunts, and grandparents.
I have heard people say that you can put those old pictures on album pages in
the freezer for a few minutes and see if that will make the glue more brittle
and easier to remove the pictures.  I haven't tried it myself, but I wouldn't
put them in there for just a little while.  Condensation, etc. might mess up
your picture.  You might try it on a picture that you wouldn't mind losing, in
case it doesn't work.
Another thing you might try is to use some fine sandpaper and lightly sand the
glue to see if you can get the rough spots out.  Might take a while, but you
could even get rid of the black paper that way, and just lightly sand through to
the glue.  (I had my students make Laminated Construction Paper Sculptures,
using layers of construction paper and Elmer's Glue All or a white craft glue
from a lumber yard.  It was hard as a rock.  To smooth it and shape it, we used
files and sandpaper, until they were extremely smooth, and like one solid piece.
It did take weeks to sand them, but it did work to go through the paper and glue
and leave a smooth surface.)
Also, you might try using a stencil knife, sideways, and try to gently scrape
away the paper and the glue.
Depending on what kind of glue and paper you have on the pictures, that might
eventually ruin your pictures anyway.  Acid, etc. could eat into your pictures.
It is always possible that the original pictures will not last, anyway, so you
do want to be sure to get copies of them.  Either take photos of them, scan
them, or both.
Good luck, and let us know what works for you!
Cecelia in Texas





   Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can see
   it. Plus, the photos could be ruined.
   Harry

   I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the back
   which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album

   Lisa Harley
   La Crescenta, CA







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

That black paper on which they were mounted is certainly not archival
therefore I think you should try to remove it. What about Un-Do? I
have used that to remove stickers that got put in the wrong place in
an archival scrapbook.

On Mar 28, 2007, at 2:02 PM, LisaHBskt@... wrote:

> In a message dated 3/28/2007 10:20:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> hdmshort@... writes:
>
> Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one
> can see
> it. Plus, the photos could be ruined.
> Harry
>
> I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the
> back
> which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album
>
> Lisa Harley
> La Crescenta, CA
>
> ************************************** AOL now offers free email to
> everyone.
> Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Instead of trying to remove the paste from your pictures, you might just have
copies made of the pictures.  Or scan them and save, then print them.
You might take them to someone who does restoration work or a museum that does
preservation, and ask what to do, or if they can recommend someone.  They might
recognize the glue and be able to help.
I took some tin types to a photographer, who took pictures of them.  Then I had
them framed in antique-looking frames for my living room.  He gave me the
negatives so that, if something happens to the photos or if I want to give
copies to other people, I can have more made from the negative.  I tried to scan
the original tin types, but they are pretty dark.
I have pictures that I pulled out of old albums, too, and many have another
picture on the back.  I didn't want to risk tearing them, so I just labeled
them, then put them in an archival box, for now, after scanning them.  I printed
out the scans, and put the copies in plastic page covers in notebooks.  (I'm
making a notebook for each family, including printed material and stories I am
writing.) This is just a temporary sort of thing as I know the  plastic covers
are not good for the pictures.  But it works for taking around to people to look
at.  This allows me to add on, write on, move around, or whatever I need to do. 
I take them to show to others who might have information that we might share, as
well as to my aunt who is in a nursing home.
I have made quite a few copies on the computer of pictures to put up in my
aunt's room in the nursing home.  Some of the pictures belonged to her parents,
aunts, and grandparents.
I have heard people say that you can put those old pictures on album pages in
the freezer for a few minutes and see if that will make the glue more brittle
and easier to remove the pictures.  I haven't tried it myself, but I wouldn't
put them in there for just a little while.  Condensation, etc. might mess up
your picture.  You might try it on a picture that you wouldn't mind losing, in
case it doesn't work.
Another thing you might try is to use some fine sandpaper and lightly sand the
glue to see if you can get the rough spots out.  Might take a while, but you
could even get rid of the black paper that way, and just lightly sand through to
the glue.  (I had my students make Laminated Construction Paper Sculptures,
using layers of construction paper and Elmer's Glue All or a white craft glue
from a lumber yard.  It was hard as a rock.  To smooth it and shape it, we used
files and sandpaper, until they were extremely smooth, and like one solid piece.
It did take weeks to sand them, but it did work to go through the paper and glue
and leave a smooth surface.)
Also, you might try using a stencil knife, sideways, and try to gently scrape
away the paper and the glue.
Depending on what kind of glue and paper you have on the pictures, that might
eventually ruin your pictures anyway.  Acid, etc. could eat into your pictures.
It is always possible that the original pictures will not last, anyway, so you
do want to be sure to get copies of them.  Either take photos of them, scan
them, or both.
Good luck, and let us know what works for you!
Cecelia in Texas





   Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can see
   it. Plus, the photos could be ruined.
   Harry

   I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the back
   which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album

   Lisa Harley
   La Crescenta, CA







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

What we used back in the'50s was either white paste or mucellage. Both
are water soluble. It should smooth out with a _damp_ sponge using no
pressure. If you get the paper very damp from this process,  it may
cause buckling in the area.
If the thickness of the glue is no greater than the paper, leaving it
alone should create no problem if put into an album; the album paper
will absorb the irregularities. Evan Crow
LisaHBskt@... wrote:

> In a message dated 3/28/2007 10:20:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> hdmshort@... <mailto:hdmshort%40sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
> Why bother to remove the paper from the back of the photos, no one can
> see
> it. Plus, the photos could be ruined.
> Harry
>
> I asked that question and the paste is very grainy and bumpy on the back
> which could damage the photos if laid flat or put in an album
>
> Lisa Harley
> La Crescenta, CA
>
> ************************************** AOL now offers free email to
> everyone.
> Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
> <http://www.aol.com.>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

> I scan everything at 300 dpi and save as a .tif file.

I scan everything at 600 dpi and save as a .tif file and as a 72 dpi .jpg
file.  600 dpi allows me to easily obtain enlargements if needed and allows
me to correct the images in Photoshop better.  Even if you won't be doing
any image correction yourself, you may want to consider doing 600 dpi anyway
in case you decide that you would like to have someone else do some
correction for you.  However, the files are large, so consider your storage
options as well.  The .tif file is the best archival format (no image
compression, not a proprietary format) but I use the .jpg for sharing with
my family on my website and through e-mail.

-Andi Windham

This was forwarded to me and it just sounds like a good idea...after all, if we
as historians are trying to preserve our family heritage, this sounds like
another way to do just that!
Pamm


("IN GOD WE TRUST") WRITE IT ON  THE BACK OF YOUR
ENVELOPES

       I THINK THIS A GREAT  IDEA.  I WILL START WRITING THIS
ON FRONT  OF ALL MY ENVELOPES, TOO!

       You may have heard in the news that a couple of Post
Offices in Texas have been forced to take down small posters
that say "IN GOD WE TRUST,"
       The law, they say, is being violated.


       Anyway, I heard proposed on a radio station show,
that we should all write "IN GOD WE 'TRUST"  on the back of
all our mail After all, that is our national motto, and it's
on all the money we use to buy th ose stamps.
       I think it is a wonderful idea.

       We must take back our  nation from all the people who
think that anything that offends them should be removed!!!

       If you like this idea, please pass it on and DO IT.
       The idea of writing or stamping "IN GOD WE TRUST" on
our  envelopes sounds good to me.
       I'M HAVING MY STAMP MADE TODAY!


       It has been reported that 86% of Americans believe in
God. Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why
there is such a mess about having "In God We Trust" on our
money and having God in the pledge of Allegiance.

       Could it be that WE just need to take action and tell
the 14% to "sit down and shut up"?

  If you agree, pass this on, if not delete .

---------------------------------
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sit down and shut up?  Isn't that what King George would have said to Patrick
Henry?

At 03:56 PM 3/29/2007 -0700, you wrote:

>
> This was forwarded to me and it just sounds like a good idea...after all, if
> we as historians are trying to preserve our family heritage, this sounds
like
> another way to do just that!
> Pamm
>
> ("IN GOD WE TRUST") WRITE IT ON THE BACK OF YOUR
> ENVELOPES
>
> I THINK THIS A GREAT IDEA. I WILL START WRITING THIS
> ON FRONT OF ALL MY ENVELOPES, TOO!
>
> You may have heard in the news that a couple of Post
> Offices in Texas have been forced to take down small posters
> that say "IN GOD WE TRUST,"
> The law, they say, is being violated.
>
>
> Anyway, I heard proposed on a radio station show,
> that we should all write "IN GOD WE 'TRUST" on the back of
> all our mail After all, that is our national motto, and it's
> on all the money we use to buy th ose stamps.
> I think it is a wonderful idea.
>
> We must take back our nation from all the people who
> think that anything that offends them should be removed!!!
>
> If you like this idea, please pass it on and DO IT.
> The idea of writing or stamping "IN GOD WE TRUST" on
> our envelopes sounds good to me.
> I'M HAVING MY STAMP MADE TODAY!
>
>
> It has been reported that 86% of Americans believe in
> God. Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why
> there is such a mess about having "In God We Trust" on our
> money and having God in the pledge of Allegiance.
>
> Could it be that WE just need to take action and tell
> the 14% to "sit down and shut up"?
>
> If you agree, pass this on, if not delete .
>
> ---------------------------------
> TV dinner still cooling?
> Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thank you!

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, Tom Brown <broonesq@...> wrote:
>
> Sit down and shut up?  Isn't that what King George would have said
to Patrick
> Henry?
>
> At 03:56 PM 3/29/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >
> > This was forwarded to me and it just sounds like a good
idea...after all, if
> > we as historians are trying to preserve our family heritage, this
sounds
> like
> > another way to do just that!
> > Pamm
> >
> > ("IN GOD WE TRUST") WRITE IT ON THE BACK OF YOUR
> > ENVELOPES
> >
> > I THINK THIS A GREAT IDEA. I WILL START WRITING THIS
> > ON FRONT OF ALL MY ENVELOPES, TOO!
> >
> > You may have heard in the news that a couple of Post
> > Offices in Texas have been forced to take down small posters
> > that say "IN GOD WE TRUST,"
> > The law, they say, is being violated.
> >
> >
> > Anyway, I heard proposed on a radio station show,
> > that we should all write "IN GOD WE 'TRUST" on the back of
> > all our mail After all, that is our national motto, and it's
> > on all the money we use to buy th ose stamps.
> > I think it is a wonderful idea.
> >
> > We must take back our nation from all the people who
> > think that anything that offends them should be removed!!!
> >
> > If you like this idea, please pass it on and DO IT.
> > The idea of writing or stamping "IN GOD WE TRUST" on
> > our envelopes sounds good to me.
> > I'M HAVING MY STAMP MADE TODAY!
> >
> >
> > It has been reported that 86% of Americans believe in
> > God. Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why
> > there is such a mess about having "In God We Trust" on our
> > money and having God in the pledge of Allegiance.
> >
> > Could it be that WE just need to take action and tell
> > the 14% to "sit down and shut up"?
> >
> > If you agree, pass this on, if not delete .
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > TV dinner still cooling?
> > Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

The local newpaper where I live ran a story on the photos I found.
There was very little info to go on .After researching, the paper
and I, came up with these clues.  Any info or ideas, I would be
greatful.Nice to meet you all, and thank you for your time.I
posted photos under Lost Morgon Family.
--------- Mr. or Ms. Morgan: Please come and claim your Great-Aunt
Kate Or her photo, at least A black-and-white portrait of Kate
Morgan, taken in 1881, is one of 20 old photographs found by east
Lancaster resident Connie Lewis in September in a dirt lot near her
home. She shared the photos with the Valley Press recently in hope
of reuniting them with their owner. The discovery
The story begins on a sunny late summer day when Lewis took her
children bicycling at the dirt lot next to the Lancaster National
Soccer Center on 30th Street East at Avenue L.
They hadn't gone far when one of the children spotted a flat, brown
paper package lying in the dirt. It was blank on the outside, so
they opened it.Inside, they found an old multi-photo frame encasing
20 black-and-white and sepia prints.
"The frame and glass were all broken, but the photos were fine,"
Lewis said. Ignoring advice to leave the photos or throw them away,
Lewis brought them home. She pieced together what information she
could from notes jotted on the backs of photos, and from a cryptic
list

on a sheet of notepaper inside the back of the frame.
She concluded several of the people in the photographs had the
surname Morgan, and the photos were taken between 1869 and 1930.
"To keep them that long, they must have meant something to
somebody," Lewis said. Nowhere did she find a name or address for
the owner, however.Unsure what else to do, she put the photos into
an album for safekeeping, and started hunting for the missing
Morgans.

Now we pass the torch on to you, our readers. Take a good look at
the photos and descriptions and, if you can, help us find their
home.
The 20 photographs include portraits, outdoor snapshots from Texas,
postcard.They' re a visual tour through an America in transition,
starting with a playing card-sized portrait of a David Morgan and
his wife: Mr. Morgan sports an Abe Lincoln beard, and Mrs. Morgan
sits stiffly in the heavy layers of clothing that leave only her
hands, face and a bit of a boot-covered toe exposed to view. This is
the American family in 1869, the year Ulysses S. Grant was
inaugurated president to oversee a nation healing from the wounds of
the Civil War. From there, jump ahead to 1918 and a postcard picture
of two young men in World War I uniforms, sitting in front of an
American flag backdrop. The postmark on the back is from Fortress
Monroe, Va.,and it's addressed to Mrs. D.M. Morgan of Chicago.
(Incidentally, the postcard stamp cost 1 cent.) Two more photos,
these of "Dad" and a friend, are of men in uniform from the same
period. This is America's new generation, ready for a war "to end
all wars." The war is over and the Roaring '20s have begun when we
reach a whimsical photo of two young women, "Mom and Aunt Helen,"
playing with a garden hose in a grassy back yard. The girls' short-
sleeved, low-necked dresses stop well above the knee, making the two
a giggling, giddy spectacle that would no doubt have scandalized
Grandma Morgan. The latest photo, with a note saying it was taken
about 1930, shows the same two women with outrageously wide, short
perms posing with a well-dressed man, "Uncle Warner," in front of an
automobile in the driveway. Although the ladies look a bit silly by
today's fashion standards, the message of success and prosperity is
clear: the Great Depression and a second World War have yet to touch
their lives. Perhaps the only other photo that needs mentioning is
that of an oil well, dated 1909 on the back of the photograph but
listed as "West Texas Gusher - 1921" on the notepad.
The word "Breckenridge" (Texas) on a photo of "Dad's company car"
makes it likely that this is a shot of one of the oil wells owned
by the Walker-Caldwell Oil Co., founded in 1917, in the vicinity of
Breckenridge. It's also quite possible that "Dad" Morgan worked for
the oil company either right before or right after the Great War.
Facts, myths, rabbit trails The big question is, how did these
photos end up in a desert lot in Lancaster?

thanks again connie

--- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "tripp8908" <barbarann@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
> wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
> Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
> thanks for your time.
> Barbara
>

Along those same lines are there U.S. Army photos availble for accessing

Type in google or what ever internet program you have WWII US Airforce
photographs and just US Air Force.
   Harry
fkahuna <fkahuna@...> wrote:
           --- In genphoto@yahoogroups.com, "tripp8908" <barbarann@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I saw a post for websites that have navel photo's of WWII and I was
> wondering if there is a simular archive for WWII photo's of the Air
> Force (or I think it was Army Air Core)
> thanks for your time.
> Barbara
>

Along those same lines are there U.S. Army photos availble for accessing






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Connie,
You might take those to a museum or university where they house local history
collections.  A large library might also help.
Is that Lancaster, Texas?  I wasn't quite clear on what state they were found
in.
The picture could have been stolen when a house was vandalized and the pictures
dropped or discarded as not valuable (that happened to me.  Lost everything I
had, except what was at my mother's house, or what I had with me.Losing my old
pictures, funeral records, and books,  was worse than losing my furniture and
clothes!)
It could have been dropped when someone was moving.
Possibly, it was thrown away by someone who was trying to clear out old things.
Maybe the people lived in an occupied place close to the empty lot.
Lots of possibilities.
But, if you can't find the original family, I imagine that a museum or library
would like to have them for their collection.  Especially since there is some
information on the pictures.
Another option might be to look for a message board for the surname Morgan.  You
have probably done that already, but it was a thought.
There was a Morgan family in my hometown of Calvert, Texas.  They have about all
died out, now, like many of the older families.  There was a grand daughter, but
I don't know what happened to her.
Good luck in your search.  You have written a nice story from your detective
work!
Cecelia



   The local newpaper where I live ran a story on the photos I found.
   There was very little info to go on .After researching, the paper
   and I, came up with these clues. Any info or ideas, I would be
   greatful.Nice to meet you all, and thank you for your time.I
   posted photos under Lost Morgon Family.
   --------- Mr. or Ms. Morgan: Please come and claim your Great-Aunt
   Kate Or her photo, at least A black-and-white portrait of Kate
   Morgan, taken in 1881, is one of 20 old photographs found by east
   Lancaster resident Connie Lewis in September in a dirt lot near her
   home. She shared the photos with the Valley Press recently in hope
   of reuniting them with their owner. The discovery
   The story begins on a sunny late summer day when Lewis took her
   children bicycling at the dirt lot next to the Lancaster National
   Soccer Center on 30th Street East at Avenue L.
   They hadn't gone far when one of the children spotted a flat, brown
   paper package lying in the dirt. It was blank on the outside, so
   they opened it.Inside, they found an old multi-photo frame encasing
   20 black-and-white and sepia prints.
   "The frame and glass were all broken, but the photos were fine,"
   Lewis said. Ignoring advice to leave the photos or throw them away,
   Lewis brought them home. She pieced together what information she
   could from notes jotted on the backs of photos, and from a cryptic
   list

   on a sheet of notepaper inside the back of the frame.
   She concluded several of the people in the photographs had the
   surname Morgan, and the photos were taken between 1869 and 1930.
   "To keep them that long, they must have meant something to
   somebody," Lewis said. Nowhere did she find a name or address for
   the owner, however.Unsure what else to do, she put the photos into
   an album for safekeeping, and started hunting for the missing
   Morgans.

   Now we pass the torch on to you, our readers. Take a good look at
   the photos and descriptions and, if you can, help us find their
   home.
   The 20 photographs include portraits, outdoor snapshots from Texas,
   postcard.They' re a visual tour through an America in transition,
   starting with a playing card-sized portrait of a David Morgan and
   his wife: Mr. Morgan sports an Abe Lincoln beard, and Mrs. Morgan
   sits stiffly in the heavy layers of clothing that leave only her
   hands, face and a bit of a boot-covered toe exposed to view. This is
   the American family in 1869, the year Ulysses S. Grant was
   inaugurated president to oversee a nation healing from the wounds of
   the Civil War. From there, jump ahead to 1918 and a postcard picture
   of two young men in World War I uniforms, sitting in front of an
   American flag backdrop. The postmark on the back is from Fortress
   Monroe, Va.,and it's addressed to Mrs. D.M. Morgan of Chicago.
   (Incidentally, the postcard stamp cost 1 cent.) Two more photos,
   these of "Dad" and a friend, are of men in uniform from the same
   period. This is America's new generation, ready for a war "to end
   all wars." The war is over and the Roaring '20s have begun when we
   reach a whimsical photo of two young women, "Mom and Aunt Helen,"
   playing with a garden hose in a grassy back yard. The girls' short-
   sleeved, low-necked dresses stop well above the knee, making the two
   a giggling, giddy spectacle that would no doubt have scandalized
   Grandma Morgan. The latest photo, with a note saying it was taken
   about 1930, shows the same two women with outrageously wide, short
   perms posing with a well-dressed man, "Uncle Warner," in front of an
   automobile in the driveway. Although the ladies look a bit silly by
   today's fashion standards, the message of success and prosperity is
   clear: the Great Depression and a second World War have yet to touch
   their lives. Perhaps the only other photo that needs mentioning is
   that of an oil well, dated 1909 on the back of the photograph but
   listed as "West Texas Gusher - 1921" on the notepad.
   The word "Breckenridge" (Texas) on a photo of "Dad's company car"
   makes it likely that this is a shot of one of the oil wells owned
   by the Walker-Caldwell Oil Co., founded in 1917, in the vicinity of
   Breckenridge. It's also quite possible that "Dad" Morgan worked for
   the oil company either right before or right after the Great War.
   Facts, myths, rabbit trails The big question is, how did these
   photos end up in a desert lot in Lancaster?

   thanks again connie





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]