Welcome to Hidetown- This time we are looking at a photograph circulating on the Internet, supposedly of Wild Bill Hickok.
Anatomy of a Doppelganger
You can see from all of the entries below that I take western history photographs pretty seriously. As I expanded my collection, I had to devise a way (which I trusted) to make the decisions about which of my photographs were actually treasures and which were just wanna-be's. I call that trick “Quintangulation,” or just Q-5 for short, and it is a digital technique which I have come to trust in very much.
In a nutshell, Q-5 is built on the assumption that adult facial features have certain mathematical ratios which never change, especially the distance between the eyes (pupils), and between the eyes and the nostrils... and to a lesser degree the upper lip and the chin which might change a little, but also taking into account the ears and hairlines, and jaw or cheek bones if they are prominent. The weakness in this technique is that it depends on a good photograph of the person to already be extant, and from nearly the same angle. But for famous people, this requirement is usually surmountable.
This face has been marked to see how well it compared to Morgan Earp. Short of a match, it scored about 90%, similar to the photo above.
Some faces might be quite similar to a famous person, but will fail this kind of scrutiny regarding proportion. I see on Ebay that many people claim to have found and are trying to sell a rare, “important historical image,” which they have successfully run through some kind of computer facial recognition program, which now (they believe) qualifies their image to sell for millions of dollars. And yet my technique almost always says they are mere doppelgangers. I am not saying that I am smarter than a computer, but computers are only as smart as the persons operating them... and very well might be ignoring eye or hair color, appropriate period clothing, or some key feature which was obscured by a shadow... in other words it takes human judgment, based on historical knowledge to really authenticate such a treasure. And that after the two likenesses have been carefully compared to discern whether they are mere look- alikes, or in fact share these mathematical facial relationships.
I believe that part of the problem with the facial recognition technology is that there is a margin of variance left for changes which happen to every face over time. This fudge factor might facilitate the erroneous crowning of an otherwise average tintype, and propel a flurry of stories in local newspapers excited about the “new discovery,” all cultivated by non-historians who trust in the technology a bit too much. The technology is merely saying that over all, comparing this face and that face, measuring many variable traits such as the hair, the eyebrows, facial hair, etc, all features which could change, are some percentage similar to one another. The hard, unarguable proportions I speak of with my technique are not near as important to the more popular digital analysis. The user of the facial recognition program may or may not build their results on the pupil's and nostril's spacial relationships first, and might subjectively want to share in the discovery of an important historical find. And those variables are too low a bar for objects which might be worth a great deal to collectors and to history.
Thankfully, Wild Bill was well documented from his youth through his abbreviated life. He was (to be kind), a beady-eyed, hawk nosed, raw boned hunk, who probably killed more men than all the other gunslingers in the west combined. Not bragging, he confessed to have killed hundreds of Confederates while serving as a Union sniper during the Civil War. He was a nervous character, unafraid to kill and not ready to die, who survived by being a little sharper than his enemies, and willing to pull the trigger without hesitation... regardless whether his foe was facing him or not. Anyway, I gave this fuzzy visage a higher score for a doppelganger, (than usual) because I could only find a few discrepancies after the Q-5 was applied. It is very close... but I believe a clearer version of this photograph would reveal the nose is not drooped or pointed enough. I gave it a “90” score, where “95” is the highest score I ever give anything. But I also require a 95 to recognize any image as a possible authentic likeness of an historical personality. The eyes and the nose must be very close, or the rest does not matter.
Yes, in the interests of history, I am willing to perform this technique for people who think they have a historical discovery. The technique pretty much speaks for itself. It is just math. But the math creates a pretty high bar- so high that many famous pictures of various famous people do not pass the test! But that is another story... some of which you can find down below...
Feel free to search the site as well, you might find other subjects of interest! And thanks for pulling up and sittin' on the porch for awhile. It gets lonely out here at Hidetown!
A sixth generation Texan, landscape painter, sculptor, photographer, writer and historian, Russell Cushman shares his passion for the music, art and history of the Brazos Valley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Anatomy of a Doppelganger
Welcome to Hidetown- This time we are looking at a photograph circulating on the Internet, supposedly of Wild Bill Hickok. You can see f...
-
If you gathered all of the Old West buffs and historians in the world and had an election, and picked the most notorious, most mysterious w... -
Appointed by the State of Texas as District Attorney, Temple Houston, (pictured ABOVE or LEFT) a fledgling lawyer and Sam Houston's y...