date of this photo and anything on the purpose of the gathering

[Flattybasher9]

"The building looks like some of the old pigeon lofts," or the old salmon fishing station at Newburgh/Port Errol, Aberdeenshire.

Malky

[mazi]

We have missed a vital bit.


Welcome to rootschat mhillbilly. You must be wondering if you made the right decision


Mike

[Gadget]

"The building looks like some of the old pigeon lofts," or the old salmon fishing station at Newburgh/Port Errol, Aberdeenshire.

Malky

.. and the medals/badges are for those who had won 

Didn't have salmon fishing stations in Finchley back then 

[despair]

......so it's a gathering celebrating the loft board guano deposit of the year?

(I feel it's entirely credible that it is a pigeon fancier/racer association,but somehow,that just doesn't look like a real board).

Roger

[Flattybasher9]

Rotate the picture to have the "holes" on the board at the top. Play with the contrast and see which letters are visible.

Malky

[Ray T]

Admittedly, I haven’t read every post in the seven pages of this thread but I do think that people are missing a trick with respect to the white “board”. I think that it could simply be a “spoiler”.

A photographer turns up and takes a photo of some sort of gathering hoping to sell umpteen copies to the participants. Every potential purchaser needs to see the photo but the photographer doesn’t want to loose a sale so marks the “sample” photo by placing a piece of tape or card on the negative or simply over part of the image on his enlarging easel to make the image unacceptable for display but not obscuring any important detail so everyone can see themselves.

The result - a large white obtrusive mark on the print!

[Gadget]

The OP says that it's in the original print. If so, it must have been stuck on the neg (what size was the neg/plate)  or is a genuine object or the original wasn't the original.

[Ray T]

The OP says that it's in the original print. If so, it must have been stuck on the neg (what size was the neg/plate)  or is a genuine object or the original wasn't the original.

Anything more or less opaque coming between the printers illumination source and the paper they were printing on would produce this result in exactly the same way as muck on your negative will end up as white spots on your print.

[Gadget]

The OP says that it's in the original print. If so, it must have been stuck on the neg (what size was the neg/plate)  or is a genuine object or the original wasn't the original.

Anything more or less opaque coming between the printers illumination source and the paper they were printing on would produce this result in exactly the same way as muck on your negative will end up as white spots on your print.

Ray

Please read what I said. Stuck on = place on by whatever means.(add - on neg or printing paper)

I know about printing techniques. I studied photography to postgrad level and taught 'creative photograhy ' on degree courses.

Add - if it wasn't close to or on the neg, the edges would not be so distinct. Also, it could be that that area was masked from the developer solution while processing.