Thank you for your contribution Pat.
Well spotted, re the wedding ring. Must admit to not having noticed. She did get married in 1927, so now c 1927/28.
A few weeks ago SARAH would not allow me to submit a church picnic photo that was in my archives, as it was a scan, and I could not find the original photo, to be able to prove provenance.
Something I need, if the local Church are going to publish it on the occasion of the 100th year of their church.
The big picnic’s were regularly held, but I could find no on line newspaper account that would verify my late Father’s notation, that it was one held in his neighbours paddock. The one 1916 account I found, I believed was too early, and I could not reconcile elements of the photo, to be able to date it myself. There are approximately 120 people in it.
Digitization of the local newspaper currently ends at 1922.
Eventually I found the photo in 1980’s correspondence. It was sent to me in a packet of some 15 family based photos, to aid our research efforts into a large extended family, complicated by cousins marring cousins, through many generations.
Some photos were notated others not. Known dates ranged from 1929 to my correspondent’s wedding in 1936.
Last week, for reasons stated on the forum, I successfully posted the ANNIE photo from that packet of photos, and privately contacted Jim1 for an opinion on dating.
You did such a great job with the first photo, last night I decided to flick off another of the photos so included. But evidently did not study it too throughly, to notice the ring.
There are living relatives [including some active on RC] that really appreciate what you are able to do with these old heritage photos, from their extended family.
In our area, privately owned [candid] cameras did not come into their own, until after the big depression of the 1930’s, so we cherish those that we do manage to find.
Many thankyou’s.
- Alan.