WEDDINGS - Here come the BRIDES!

[colt45]

really GREAT SA shots, here comes the bride

[Larrister]

KM wedding.

[Larrister]

Sleeve chevrons suggest that this guy is KM.

[Wolfensteiner]

When are some of you guys going to realise that just because you paid for a copy or original of someone elses photo that is DOES NOT make it apart of your personal collection? It reamins the property of the photographer and/or the family that had it taken. So what if someone saves the photo off the internet and sends it around? It is history, it is not and never will be your property.

[Vikki]

When are some of you guys going to realise that just because you paid for a copy or original of someone elses photo that is DOES NOT make it apart of your personal collection? It reamins the property of the photographer and/or the family that had it taken. So what if someone saves the photo off the internet and sends it around? It is history, it is not and never will be your property.

[Note: AussieTiger had his Username changed to Wolfensteiner between the time this post was written and his reply below. ~Vikki]


AussieTiger, you are talking about...what?

The print of a photograph I own--bought and paid for--certainly is my property (in the case of photos that I've watermarked as being from my collection, or Larrister's in the case of his more recently posted photos above). That print is both my property and part of my personal collection. The copyright, on the other hand, is not.

What that means is that yes, someone can save the photo off the internet and post it elsewhere, and there's nothing that Larry or I, or anyone else who posts a scan of one of the prints in their collections, can do about it. Because we own the physical copy of the photograph, not the copyright to it.

You should get your terminology straight before you start unloading on people.

~Vikki

[Larrister]

When are some of you guys going to realise that just because you paid for a copy or original of someone elses photo that is DOES NOT make it apart of your personal collection? It reamins the property of the photographer and/or the family that had it taken. So what if someone saves the photo off the internet and sends it around? It is history, it is not and never will be your property.

AussieTiger, you are talking about...what?

The print of a photograph I own--bought and paid for--certainly is my property (in the case of photos that I've watermarked as being from my collection, or Larrister's in the case of his more recently posted photos above). That print is both my property and part of my personal collection. The copyright, on the other hand, is not.

What that means is that yes, someone can save the photo off the internet and post it elsewhere, and there's nothing that Larry or I, or anyone else who posts a scan of one of the prints in their collections, can do about it. Because we own the physical copy of the photograph, not the copyright to it.

You should get your terminology straight before you start unloading on people.

~Vikki

Nicely said Viiki!

Here's a nice Luftwaffe portrait of a Leutnant wearing a Pilot Badge and DRL sports badge. This pic is from my own collection.

Cheers
Larry

[Larrister]

Another. This senior NCO is wearing the Air gunner/Flight engineer medal, Grade B Glider pilot's badge, the SA sports badge in bronze or gold. He also has a Flight Personnel trade specialist cloth badge on his lower left arm. The sword may be Luftwaffe issue as well.

Cheers
Larry

[Larrister]

Last for now.

An Obergefreiter with his bride. He is wearing the Pilot badge, a version of the much-coveted Golden HJ Leader's Badge and the C-grade cloth Glider Pilot badge. I don't know which pattern his Luft. dagger is.

Cheers
Larry

[Wolfensteiner]

You can say all you want, and it is nothing personal, I enjoy viewing the photographs that Larrister has posted. I am just saying I think it is wrong, full stop, to brand your name all over a photo that you didnt take. Again, it is history, it is not about 'who paid for it'.

[Vikki]

Sleeve chevrons suggest that this guy is KM.

(Photo reattached below for reference.)

Larry, just a thought: Rather than KM, the cap eagle on a platter-style Schirmmütze could be an early style Army one (smaller, with more rounded wings than later ones). Also, KM hat wreaths are more vertical than Army ones, so that they actually go up slightly onto the body of the hat. Also, a KM NCO would be wearing the "Donald Duck" hat rather than a Schirmmütze, as in your previous photo at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 6#p1297586, wouldn't he?

These things could point to the sleeve rank insignia being for a pre-1936 Heer Obergefreiter. If so, this is an especially cool photo of a seldom-seen rank.

Edit: One thing I forgot to add that supports this being an early photo: The bride's hairstyle is an early one, finger-waved or marcelled (I think that's the term), which is usually associated with the 1920s or early 1930s.

In any case, very nice photo!!!

~Vikki

[Marcus]

A nonsense post from vszulc was removed.

/Marcus

[Annelie]

Thankyou Marcus for removing an insulting IMHO post.

[MIKE29]

Found these two in my collection.
Both undated.
Mike

[Vikki]

Great photos, Mike! Thanks for posting them, and adding to the thread.

Best,
~Vikki

[Vikki]

Thankyou Marcus for removing an insulting IMHO post.

Indeed, Annelie.

~Vikki