Is this Abraham Lincoln?

[Xristobal]

I am the anonymous— I more. My name is Chris Tarr. I appreciate all of your feedback and thank you very much, Roger, for posting the images.

A little about me—
I have no social media account’s, so this forum is my first. Thank you Roger for allowing me to join. I am high functioning autistic, severely color deficient and have become obsessed with early photographic process history. My Wife and I have two beautiful children (9 & 14) and we operate a pediatric therapy (OT, PT & ST) services business in the Denver region. My area of study is within archeology, although the nomadic lifestyle did not function with a marriage and then a family. I have studied and been fortunate enough to practice archeological methods and principles nearly all of my formative years growing up near Mesa Verde National Park and having seasonal archeologist teachers and classes elementary through college.



We are currently at a point within imagery technology and forensic analyzation’s that will soon be shown some mind blowing discoveries, reveal history and will solve many mysteries. For now we are stuck with the archaic practice with attempts to compare ears of altering angles, differing head position, (we will learn) many retouches & various lighting aspect differentials that affect proper comparison. Currently moles, warts, beards, hats allow dirt to be thrown upon our sacred history. This practice, although currently what we have, is not a great measure to identify a sitter within a photograph. Soon, this will no longer occur as a methodology using various tools will allow for each photo to offer empirical scientific evidence that was left by studio artisans and photographers whom applied pre-plate and post fixing evidences that will allow all daguerreotypes, ambrotypes, ferrotype’s and colloidal negatives to be identified. That’s right, ALL EARLY POSITIVE IMAGES HAVE EMPIRICAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO ALLOW FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE SITTER AND SUBJECTS, within each image. This will be the truest of the definition of provenance as it pertains to the origin and creation of these images, prior to leaving the studio. The record of ownership may enhance its story but will not be allowed to eliminate our history any longer.

It appears our eyes fail is when analyzing faces and ears and the main proponent within this current scenario is due to age and health atrophy, likely due to blue mass pills affecting the eyes causing drooping, most organs and the nervous system. It is also appears apparent that Lincoln had a full or near full molar extraction which had drawn in his cheeks. These are speculative, but the age difference is also a factor. My archaic comparisons show comparison’s to an 1858 portrait, while this daguerreotype of Lincoln is an 1852 copy that was re-daguerreotyped using a Meade Brothers application upon the copy called the “Rembrandt Style”. This application was applied to copies and was done within the plate preparation phase, to allow a face to be brightened and softened. The original daguerreotype that it was copied from was likely taken between the years of 1845 and 1852. This dag shows Lincoln at a younger fuller faced and healthy version of Lincoln that our eyes have difficulty recognizing. The only research I found that does not align is how Lincoln had written the letter to the little girl stating that he hadn’t had whiskers. Apparently, he did and one can only imagine that Lincoln was trying to make her feel special in her advisement. We know he was a sweet, good hearted man and any embellishment of Honest Abe’s pen would only be done to create happiness.

My method will give no doubts that it is indeed Lincoln and this method has been practiced for over two years now with identified and unidentified images.

Purported images such as Albert Kaplan’s Lincoln will now have a method to discover the evidence supports truth or falsehood to this assertion. My findings will show that Kaplan’s young Lincoln Dag is ironically a young William Henry Seward portrayed by NYC Daguerreotypist Anson. It is not Lincoln and this one I sent Roger is.

I will be meeting with photo process historians for peer evaluation and soon after the methodolgy will be submitted for provisional patent protection. Truth is— you’ll all be able to use it to identify photos on your own, but, I must ensure that ancestry or other institutions will not prosper from my own discovery. It’s astounding and I cannot wait to show those whom wish to learn this method.

Harold Holzer once said, Regarding Lincoln’s face (above) within the 1846(-1848) Shepherd LOC daguerrotype:

I'm always surprised that people think people will age the way they do in movies…but, faces really change -- noses droop, things sag, a lot can happen… the Library of Congress's (Shepherd) daguerreotype was originally doubted, too, requiring Lincoln's son Robert to authenticate it three times. [A Young Mr. Lincoln? Auction May Shed Light. Judith H. Dobrzynski. New York Times. 1998 https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/20/arts/...ight.html]

Thank you all for your feedback and for reading this.

Chris

---

Hi Susan! I am a person. I have feelings and do not have time for wistful thinking nor reckless history detractors. I am not in need of money and fear the scale of the potential monetary consequences and social aspects of this discovery. i am not programmed for this, but felt it was important to show someone I understand your thoughts and did not think it was Lincoln upon first viewing it either. I get it. I do like the odd fellows pin, don’t like the beard and hate the stereotypical hat and beard together, but, it’s an amazing photo of Abraham Lincoln. Try looking at it to prove it rather than disprove… positivity is enlightening! Chris