[Oleg Volk]

Designed to start discussions.

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/19015-2/army9683.jpg

[DReicht]

Pardon my lack of 20th century vestmental knowledge, but why is she dressed in a wedding gown? Supposed to represent 1907?

I'm not even being nitpicky its a very creative idea if your trying to make her look as if she was a native to the early 20th century, and I assume tahts what you're doing. I just want to make sure my assumption is correct.

[stevetexas]

In 1907 that outfit was sold by Victoria's Secret.......that is underclothing.

[Oleg Volk]

Trouble is, I have better photos in other costume, but most of them are with a Mosin or have a book, in addition to the 1903. I can re-shoot or re-edit with other photos and a more formal hairdo...just want feedback on the captions.

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/19000-2/raine9703.jpg http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/19007-2/raine9721.jpg

Would either of these work better? Mosin was used in the US Army right before 1920, but her outfit is older and the stripper clips aren't period, either. The 1903 (which is missing the cocking knob) might work better.

[DReicht]

I think the captions are excellent, and I honestly would have expected that women wouldn't have been able to purchase any firearm in the 20th century. I assume that that would be a common conception among other people, so I believe the caption fist your goal.

The outfit with the Nagant seems to fit the time period much more, at least in my Star Trek time traveling episode derived knowledge ;)

[Prof. A. Wickwire]

Oleg,

I think that the photo of the woman with the book and the 1903 would work better. However, I would suggest editing to remove her bare feet from the bottom.

Just my $0.02.

Sincerely,

Prof. A. Wickwire

[Oleg Volk]

That outfit is sort of 1890-1900 vintage, but the hairdo isn't...

I can re-shoot as necessary, need input and advice.

[Jorg]

Personally, I don't like the caption. Women's suffrage was a sex-based issue where gun-control is evenly applied regarded of gender. Likewise, the appeal of owning "Army rifles" isn't readily apparent. It's like saying, "In 1907 women could sleep with cows in their bedroom. Now, their landlord prohibits it. Progress?"

I don't think many will look at that and think the right to vote and the right to own "Army rifles" are related or even on the same level. I think it would be more interesting if you could someone show that they had less ability to defend themselves in a more direct manner, if that is the angle you are going for.

[Oleg Volk]

10-4 on the bare feet -- we were trying to minimize the scuffing of the sweep and I didn't realize the feet showed.

[Oleg Volk]

I think this poster shows the problem with basing posters on existing photos. I had no vintage handguns on hand during the shoot. Will re-shoot with some older pistols and adopt your caption ideas.

[vta33]

Well, finding a good caption for a pretty girl in a period costume who's holding a rifle is a challenge. I'll start with these captions:

1. Yesterday's woman.

2. Women who won the west.

3. Granny could shoot.

4. Granny could shoot...she had to.

5. Great-grandpa wasn't the only one bringing home the bacon.

6. My great-grandpa wasn't the only one bringing home the bacon.

7. Women of style. Yesterday and today.

8. A woman of style. Yesterday and today.

My wife and kids will also come up with some captions after they see the photos. Will post more later.

[Car Knocker]

Women in Wyoming were enfranchised in 1869, women in Utah in 1870 but disenfranchised by Congress in 1887. The right to vote was written into the Utah Constitution in 1895 and accepted by Congress on November 5, 1895. It is possible that women in some other states gained the right to vote prior to 1907.

[Archer1945]

Oleg Volk, find some historical re-enactors in the Nashville area, I know there are some. They will be able to provide period correct clothes, weapons and hairdos. If you need any help drop me an email and I'll put you in contact with some friends in the St Louis area who have been in re-enacting for years and can probably tell you exactly who to contact. Btw, I think this is a tremendous idea and might just get some people to thinking about where our "civilization" is going.

[Archer1945]

DReicht as stevetexas said that is an undergarment. It is called a chemis and was worn as both an undergarment and a sleeping garment. I knew my historical re-enacting knowledge would someday prove useful. :)

[Oleg Volk]

Could you help me get in touch with WW2 and Civil War reenactors around Nashville? I am working on two calendars for 2008 and their help would be most appreciated.

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/1972-2/infantryman7195.jpg

[busy_squirrel]

I like the pose in the third pic best. It's open, honest, and direct. The slight smile shows optomism about society.

I definately think the monochromatic looks gives age and a hint at oppression, which I assume is intended, because it provokes the progress question.

Although I can draw the parallel between "modern Army weapon", maybe not everyone can. Maybe "currant miltary weapons" or "current military rifles" would work better.

I definately like the idea though, but definately nix on the bare feet. Too stereotypical.

[hso]

In 1907 A Woman Couldn't Be Trusted With The Vote But Could Own Any Current Firearm Her Husband Carried In The Army.

In 2007 Not Only Can Women Vote, But She Can Serve In The Army. Why Can't She Be Trusted With The Guns They Serv With?

[Archer1945]

Oleg, just send you and email with some info.

[ebd10]

Oleg:
Small detail; the rifle in the first and second picture looks like it has the stock from an M1917 Enfield Rifle. The M1917 was adopted because there was a shortage of M1903 Springfields. On the other hand, you may have one of the "kit bash" M1917/M1903 mutations from the '50s. Several distributors were putting Springfield barrels on Krags and M1917 barrels and stocks on Springfield receivers. Personally, I like the idea of showing a woman as in the original picture, and then the comparison picture showing a woman in Army uniform carrying an AR-15/M-16 type rifle, with the caption about not being allowed to own the rifle she carried in the service.

[mustanger98]

In these two photos, the rifle has me confused. This is clearly not a US 1903 rifle, nor is it a Turkish 1903 Mauser type. The stock is the pattern of the British P14 and US M1917 Enfields, but the handguard reminds me of a US Krag carbine. The rear sight is also all wrong for the Enfield types, not having the fins on the receiver bridge, but from here I can't tell whether the rear sight is for a Krag, a Springfield, or a Mauser.

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/19015-2/army9683.jpg

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/19000-2/raine9703.jpg

[Gewehr98]

It appears to be a vintage "Bannerman Special", or modern-day copy. Not a Krag, you'd see the metal of the left receiver magazine sideplate.

1. 1903 receiver w/mag cut-off and bobbed cocking knob (Actually a popular target mod, back in the day). It could also be a retrofitted 1917 bolt in the 1903 receiver, see pic below.

2. U.S. Enfield Model 1917 stock w/belly and pistol grip relief.

3. Shortened 1903 handguard.

She'd look better holding the Sharps, or even a Trapdoor. My Krag restoration isn't done yet. ;)

BTW, Here's an original "Bannerman Special" hybrid:

http://m1903.com/odd1903/03bannermandetail.jpg

The story:

http://m1903.com/odd1903/

[Stickjockey]

Oleg:

For Civil War reenactors, contact the North-South Skirmish Association.

http://www.n-ssa.org

There are a whole bunch of WW2 reenactors over at

http://www.g503.com

[LoneStranger]

Prof. A. Wickwire and Oleg Volk, the showing of the bare feet would be considered appropriate for the 1907 period. Remember that at that time it was considered proper that for domestic bliss the wife was to be kept "Barefoot and Pregnant"! :rolleyes:

I will now remove myself to a deep, well hidden bunker.:D

[armoredman]

You have a comfy couch, doncha?:neener:

Oleg, I like the third image. Nothing wrong with a Mosin - not many people who aren't gunnies will even recognise it as anything but a rifle, anyway. Or, reshoot a two sided poster, one with reenactor holding a baby and a rifle outside a room marked POLLS, being shooed away by the Sheriff, and then a woman in modern dress, voting, with a stormtrooper guarding the room, maybe even guiding her hand in voting.

[Oohrah]

Not sure where this going or why it covers that era. Don't see
a lot wrong with the Blue Press Girls!!!!:D

[Lucky]

It's a damned good point, that's for sure. Women are more 'equal', but are as 'free' as slaves used to be.

[Johnny_Yuma]

Scrap 85% of this concept and salvage the visual imagery. STOP making posters with more than 5 words. You are an excellent photographer and when you use images to convey your ideas you excel. The moment you start typing your product loses impact.

I like the juxtoposition of modern times and those of a century ago in regards to firearms rights but only "gunnies" will understand what you are getting at. You don't need to reach the gunnies. Change concepts. Shoot the circa 1907 lady looking pretty but stern and brandishing a period firearm with the copy "1907" above the image. Frame another shot of the same woman in modern clothes with modern hair but clutching a cell phone or Blackberry or some damned thing and looking scared and helpless. Post the copy "2007" above this image. Frame the images side-by-side with the word "PROGRESS" superimposed across the two images. Perhaps "PROGRESS?" with a question mark is better. Pay attention to expression and posture. Confidence vs. Cowardice. Self-Reliance vs. Submission.

[Oleg Volk]

Excellent point. I used to think through my posters longer, so had more terse captions...

[Johnny_Yuma]

pictures have a menacing shadow of a thug cast somewhere. In both photos, the woman faces a deadly threat but in one, she is prepared to fight back. In the other, she is preparing to die calling 911 or MSNBC or whomever she has on speed-dial.:barf:

PROGRESS?

[mustanger98]

There's a real good idea... stand up and fight and probably survive vs. die in fear and submission.

Oh, and "progress?"... I stepped in some progress out in the horse corral this mornin'; it washes off.

[beretta9]

In 1907 A Woman Couldn't Be Trusted With The Vote But Could Own Any Current Firearm Her Husband Carried In The Army.

I would have to go with this one. For just a second or so the word "modern" didn't quite fit. Stopped the flow of thought you were trying to create.

[Titan6]

The wife really liked it. Said it made a good point. Can't say it did much for me.