Reel, fish, and location help needed.

drexelantiques · Post by **drexelantiques** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:49 pm

I think this is a Giant Black Sea Bass, but may be wrong. Any other ideas on the fish?

The way the fish is posed, the pier in the background, clothes, and etc. make me think one of the Saltwater fishing clubs, and my thinking was California, could it be somewhere else?

Tintype photo, early late 1800s to early 1900s. 35 stars in the flag on the case.

The reel is metal edge, looks nickle or german silver. Hard rubber or other material side plates. Could it be a Vom Hofe? I tried to get a closeup, but is more than a bit grainy with some scratches.

Detailed Photo:http://www.drexelantiques.com/images/ba ... photob.jpg

Closeup of reel: http://www.drexelantiques.com/images/ba ... photoc.jpg

Case front: http://www.drexelantiques.com/images/ba ... photod.jpg

Thank you for any input.

Post by **john elder** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:02 pm

Is he fishing left handed or did the idiots just mount the reel backwards for the pic?...I hadn't thought about it much, but guess in the pre-anti-reverse era, you could fish the reel either way.

I need to look at my Avalon tuna club book tonight and see if that pic is in there...I know there is similar, but don't think it's the same. As i recall, the pic I remember was with Holder (?...have to check name) and I don't think that's him.

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:13 pm

That looks like the redeye my Uncle Hayes caught in the South Harperth River in 1938. Would have been a state record but he cooked it for dinner! Biggest one I ever caught was 10". Bad Bob

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:35 pm

Some older photographs were printed backwards. Like the one of William Bonney the made everyone think he was left handed. However a detailed look at his Winchester shows the photo reversed.

Harvey · Post by **Harvey** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:45 pm

Jeff,
Here is a picture of a Sea Bass that was snagged by John Elder and his brother Jake (that Jake on the right!) from around the same time frame!

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:05 pm

The flag had 35 stars only from 1863 to 1865, but the photo is probably from around the turn of the century. It probably replaced an older family picture.

I think there's a finite chance the reel is a Holzmann.

Richard Lodge · Post by **Richard Lodge** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:40 pm

I might be all wet, but I'm pretty sure tintypes involved the image being directly projected onto the light-sensitive plate, which would mean everything was backwards and reversed. I do, however, think the angler deserves a left-handed compliment for that monster bass.

Post by **john elder** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:31 pm

Right, Harv...that was before I got the face lift

I don't think that the left hand image could be created by backwards printing, since the reel is on the wrong side of the pole for right hand crank. In looking again, you can see that the line had been stripped from the reel to dry, typical of what was done with linen line...I'm guessing that the reel was put back on the rod for the pic after it was removed for cleanup and line removal...and they just weren't paying attention. On the other hand, being a lefty and knowing that left handers are the best fishermen, it would only make sense that this fellow was fishing left handed

Post by **Brian F.** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:49 pm

Could that be a background image and this was taken in a studio? I'm sure the fellow at least had to dash off into one of those changing tents to suit up for the photo. Could also explain the clueless/line-less reel (and his expression that suggests he's holding back from heaving due to the stench of a "preserved" specimen

). I'm sure if you looked on the back of that photo you'd find: "Look what I caught on my trip to the coast! Having a great time and wish you were here!"

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:51 pm

Maybe the pic is reversed. Unusual to have a handkerchief in the right-hand pocket. There may not even be a pocket on the other side (angler's left side) of the jacket, which would be even stronger evidence.

drexelantiques · Post by **drexelantiques** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:41 pm

Steve, I am sure you are correct on the case being earlier than the photo. I have had civil war soldiers and veterans in similar cases, but those were either ambrotypes or daguerreotype, this one is a tintype. I can see evidence that someone tinkered with the deorative edges and replaced the photos. I removed the photo myself just to check the type of photo.

No writing on the back of the tintype.

I bought this from a collector selling his fishing photograph collection and he had no information on it.

I do think it may be reversed as it looks like his fly and shirt button on the wrong side. In addition to the handkerchief.

I had not noticed the reel had no line on it, but it certainly appears as if it doesn't.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:44 am

Okay, here's the picture reversed. Now the hankie, shirt, fly and even the reel look okay, so we can do some more musing. Let's assume the fish was correctly IDed as a giant sea bass (stereolepis giga). Far as I can tell, they're not found in the Atlantic, so we can leap to the conclusion that tintype man is standing at the edge of the Pacific (most likely in southern Cal.).

The shadows on the guy and fish suggest the pic was taken at either early morning or late afternoon. It doesn't seem too likely that at the turn of the 20th century, anyone would be posing that way after a night of fishing in a small boat, so I'd assume that the pic was taken in late afternoon, at which time the sun very often is in the west.

If the above is correct, and if the original pic was reversed, the guy would seem to be facing north, with the water on his right. And unless he's standing along some spit of land around a cove, he'd be on the eastern side of what might have to be an island, and Catalina Is. might be a pretty good bet. I think the Avalon Tuna Club is on the eastern side of the island. Ergo...

Post by **john elder** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:03 am

My head hurts...Water is on his right (you guyz didn't see this correction) in the "correct" version shown last...assuming that's the right direction for the pic, everything would fit with him standing on the north side of the Avalon tuna club, with shot back south (club is on the east side of the island). The pier looks a bit long for the one that was there, but the background hill is passable.

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:25 am

Dangit! Its Uncle Hayes and his record redeye. He did everything backwards! Bad Bob

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:31 am

My head hurts...

John, take two aspirin and wake me tomorrow. Very early morning, no paper and crossword puzzle in sight, and an old man's fancy (except for RAM's), turns to tintypes.

But first there's more hypthesis coming. If the pic was reversed, and if it was taken in the afternoon, and if all the blather about location was correct, maybe tintype man is J. A. "Jaleoxe" Coxe:

Prove it, and the pic should be worth a small fortune!

Harvey · Post by **Harvey** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:37 am

I don't think it is "J.A.". Not enough nose and too much neck!
"H"

Jack Bright · Post by **Jack Bright** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:49 pm

Harvey--Isn`t this the same as the Grouper that was call a "Jewfish" ? It
also attained huge weights in the hundreds of pounds and was caught in
the Atlantic and the Gulf too, if memory serves correct.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:10 pm

http://indian-river.fl.us/fishing/fish/groupjew.html
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/mspcont9.html#giant

Harvey · Post by **Harvey** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:27 pm

Jack,
Steve beat me to the punch. The Jewfish isn't a Jewfish anymore. The proper name is now 'Goliath Grouper". It was changed a couple years ago as not to offend anyone. The world record is around 800lb but there was an article on the wall in 'Capt. Tony's" in Key West of one that weighed over 1100lb. If my memory serves me correct, it was caught using a 35lb Amberjack for bait.
"H"

drexelantiques · Post by **drexelantiques** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:25 pm

Tail and lower fins are wrong for the grouper. I think it is a Giant Black Sea Bass, the tail is correct, at least.

Here is the Field & Stream pin for the Giant Black Sea Bass:

Jack Bright · Post by **Jack Bright** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:04 pm

Thank you all. Never too late to learn, I hope.--Jack

drexelantiques · Post by **drexelantiques** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:12 pm

Jack, you are correct though in saying the Grouper are huge. I hooked one about 15 years back when fishing out of Tarpon springs, I thought it was going to kill me landing it, but I did eventually get it to the surface, and got it landed. I fought it longer than I did my 600 lb tiger shark, and it only weighed 220lbs.

Reel Geezer · Post by **Reel Geezer** » Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:09 am

Did they really have scaffolding and block and tackle on the beach? I've only seen photos where the fish were weighed like that on docks. I'd be inclined to vote with Brian that it is a studio photo.

Post by **Brian F.** » Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:38 pm

Yes, sorry I didn't mean to poke at it with a stick but I just thought something about the lighting between the fellow and background didn't look right. Maybe that's because we're looking at it on a computer screen?

Jack Bright · Post by **Jack Bright** » Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:59 pm

Brian--Sharp eye ! Lighting is suspect along with what I think is a painted background, which was common in photographic studios at that time.

Reel, fish, and location help needed.

Reel, fish, and location help needed.

Fish ID

Timeline for the case.

Sea Bass pic

The fish

Giant Sea Bass

Staged photo