SEE Vintage Photo--Another one with questions--Fooled me! | ||
| Photographs1229 of 5213 |  |  |
kyratango loves this.
ho2cultcha loves this.
vintagelamp loves this.
martika loves this.
fortapache loves this.
blunderbuss2 loves this.
JImam loves this.
Caperkid loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.
freon loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 7 years ago
PostCardCo…
(437 items)
I'm not sure that is a traditional train. It would be around 1920 or before. Please take a close up and tell us more. Seems like a doll would better suit the scene. But toy trains were great for boys and girls.Her identity revealed on back of a real AZO Photo Card (Photo 3)
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
Does the little girls hand look like it was burned at one time?
A toy train, or no??
It looks like a train. Maybe the photographer at the studio didn't find a doll and thought a toy train will do. That cute girl doesn't seem impressed !
I agree she has no interest in that toy and I am still not too sure about. That train!
TRAIN PEOPLE!! Tell me PLEASE about the toy on the table. Thanks.
Hello PCC - How are you? Did you see the photo of a part of my family I posted?
Anyway, I don't believe her name is Mabel because what it says is For Mabel. I think the name is on the right hand side, above where it says 3 yrs. old. Now what is her name? I can read the last name is Ishler, but the first name is a puzzle.
Looking at the part of the toy that is closest to her, it certainly could be train. It is angular, with straight lines. There are some features that stand out. But I can't see any wheels. I think there's a smudge on the photo as it's almost impossible to see clear outlines of the rest of the toy. She's not disinterested in the toy, it's just that she has to look at the camera, otherwise the photo would be a profile? Yes/No?
Her ring finger is longer than her middle finger, which is unusual - her thumb seems to be hiding inside her fist. I don't know about burned, but I think something may be wrong with the hand. You can't see her other hand, but I don't know what people at that time would think about a disfigured(?) hand being the prominent one; I mean if her right hand was totally ok, wouldn't that hand be more conspicuous - depends if they really "cared about what other people think".
I do go on a bit, don't I?
All the best,
Gillian
'....her thumb seems to be hiding inside her fist.' Maybe a better way of saying this would be, 'her thumb seems to be behind her index finger.'
Hey Lois ! Your cute little girl is a cute little boy! RALPH ISHLER :-D
The train does look like a steam locomotive :-)
This Ralph Ishler, born 1910, lived in Pennsylvania
https://www.fold3.com/page/20036511_ralph_l_ishler/
It's a boy, it's a train! Good job kyratango! :^)
Lol Bill, thanks! :-)))
A locomotive like this one, lacking the chimney ?
http://torontorha.blogspot.fr/2009/06/railways-appeared-in-toronto-in-1852.html?m=1
Curiouser & Curiouser,
KYRA--- A boy!! I don't see Ralph--I see Ralhh. But now that you mention it--those DO look like "boy shoes" ! OMG. So, we agree KYRA is a very vintage train thanks for links! His shoes tell me he must be a boy. Ha ha.
GILLIAN-- As always--you are so right and accurate about everything.. and I love that you help so much, Especially me with an eyesight problem. and what about that ring finger LONGER the middle finger?? Gosh! That is kinda creepy!
BILL thanks for reaffirming this is a boy
Thanks for all the wonderful info here--Hugs all 'round!
I don't think the middle finger is shorter, it's just bent at the first joint and touching the skirt/dress, at his leg, no problem there! Try it and see! :^)
For sure that's a boy. I'm laughing at all the comments now as I read them...we just tear shtuff apart don't we! hahaha I know you all know that men were the first to wear "heels" on their shoes too, right??? They did and the women adopted the style from them.
Well, that is new to me shareurpassion! I learn new facts everyday! Thanks very much for that tidbit!! I still think the train is too far off the ground if I am seeing it right. Vision problems here. But--Look at what I have learned---It's a BOY! and its NOT "Mabel" (Ha ha!) card was "to Mabel". Thanks all.
I like to buy photos that are "just folks", going about living ordinary lives and if I can find photos with a puzzle or and interesting aspect, then I share with others. Nothing much of value, but home and family is my focus. I guess I collect for the heart in the photo. A collection that may appeal more to females than males, altho plenty of our guys are supportive here. I also like outdoor photos and interesting places. Not into military, wars, guns, cars (not so much) and guy stuff. But I love old photos-
-I have given up on tins because I think they are headed for disaster with the darkening aspect So no more tins will be purchased.I do keep purchases of any photo to $1.00 to $5.00 tops. You wouldn't believe I have gotten good photos, often-- for less that 50 cents!