Author Topic: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?  (Read 196202 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #420 on: January 17, 2006, 01:16:02 PM »
Quote
There is also the letter seen by Dominique Auclère from Hans Herman Krampf (Berenberg-Gossler´s colleague) to Gertrude Schanzkowski written 11.4.1959 :" .....  At the confrontation in 1938 you were not the only one who recognized her as your sister. Your brothers and sisters also recognized her but refrained to say so in order not to make any obstacles in her career. After  that your sister Maria has died and your brother Valerian lives in Poland. Then only your brother Felix and you remain to be heard at  the trial in Hamburg. I also inform you that you have nothing to fear if you told the truth as there is a prescription now."   Clearly according to this letter this laywer had contact with at least Gertrude and that he somehow got information that they believed AA was their sister.  I may also add that Dominique Auclère was pro AA  and sympathetic to her case even if she tried to be objective. She reported from the trials in Hamburg in the late 1950´s and beginning of the 60´s for her newspaper Le Figaro.  It was said that Berenberg-Gossler was going to publish his memoires but so far I haven´t seen anything of that.  He expressed his respect ot what he called AA´s life achievement. She never gave up in spite of all the difficulties. I believe there is a lot to discover in the archives in Germany if you had the time and possibility to search there.


I fail to see where this letter tells us that Gertrude, Felix or any other members of the FS family has admitted that AA was FS.   Yes, it does tell us this man's opinion:
>> At the confrontation in 1938 you were not the only one who recognized her as your sister. Your brothers and sisters also recognized her but refrained to say so in order not to make any obstacles in her career.<<

The first time I read it,  it sounded more like to me a person is trying to convince members of FS family to admit something publicly at long last.

A person who is trying to tell the family that they will not be libel for any costs acquired by AA.

According to Steven,  this person was pro-AA.  But I have no clue as to who he was/is.  

Did this man  have any written letters from the FS family to him which actually admitted they thought AA was FS?

If he did, I'm sure they would have been published a long time ago.

SO,  I really can't hold much weight on this letter alone.

For all I know,  it was just another attempt to convince the family of FS to admitt AA was FS.

Far as I know,  the family of FS have never admitted in writting AA was FS.

The outburst which Gertrude had toward AA in the police station is the only time there is a hint that one of the family thought she might have been FS.  I'm not sure if this statement isn't just heresay.  Was it actually written down by the police?  If it was,  I'd like to know all the words which surrounded this outburst.  Also, from what I understand,  Gertrude was "emotional" and "highly strung" and often times these emotions lead her into difficulties within her own family.

Can someone give me more information on this meeting that was arranged by the police and if it was recorded or is it all just heresay kind of stuff?

Thanks.

AGRBear


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #421 on: January 17, 2006, 03:30:29 PM »
Quote


 In this, the second half of our special retrospective on Anna Anderson's legacy we have an exclusive interview with Dr. Gunther Von Berenberg-Gossler, the most prominent attorney to oppose Anderson during her marathon legal fights in Germany. Concluding with a special interview with Prince Michael Romanoff, who provides us his thoughts on a case which vexed his family for decades.  
 
Dr. Gunther Von Berenberg-Gossler,  
 
Few cases in the annals of legal history were as long or acrimonious as the petitions made by Anna Anderson in German Courts to gain official recognition as the Grand Duchess Anastasia, daughter of Russia's last Tsar Nicholas II. Starting in 1928 and not concluding until the 1970's, costing the German Government and all involved vast sums of money.  
 
No one living today involved in opposing Anna Anderson is better qualified to discus the case then Dr. Gunther Von Berenberg-Gossler, attorney appointed in 1955 to oppose Anderson's claims on behalf of the Swedish and British royal families with the financial backing of Lord Mountbatten.  
 
Gunther Von Berenberg-Gossler was born 21 February 1911 in Freiburg/Schwarzwald in Germany, studying in Freiburg, Munich and Hamburg he earned a doctorate in law and soon established a reputation as one of Germany's finest jurists. Although his career is marked by achievements which have earned him international respect it's his involvement in the Anna Anderson case which will forever make him famous, a complex legal affair which kept him busy for over 12 years.  
 
"From the very start of my involvement in the case it was clear to me Anna Anderson was Franziska Schanzkowska," says Dr. Von Berenberg-Gossler in his Hamburg home, "her true identity was never in question to me, there was abundant evidence, including blood testsand testimony from her sister Gertrude Schanzkowska. So in 1994 when I received word DNA tests conducted in Britain and the United States had proven this I was pleased but not moved, it was old news to me."  
 


>>Dr. Gunther Von Berenberg-Gossler, the most prominent attorney to oppose Anderson during her marathon legal fights in Germany<<

Since he was the opposition,  of course he'd say all of this.

And, of course he knew a great deal about the case.

However, if he had proven AA was FS during the court trial,  then I would look upon this statement differently.  He did not.  Therefore,  I do not.

Gertrude's testimony in the court case???  What is he talking about?  Did she testify?  What did she say, if she did?  Far as I know she never said in court or signed anything that tells us that she thought AA was FS.

As to the blood tests of the DNA / mtDNA,  you already know that I haven't come to any conclusions about AA being FS.

This subject really doesn't belong on this thread.  This is about photgoraphic comparisons.

Speaking of which,  well.... I'm still waiting to see the original or a good copy upon which we can all agree we can use so we can compare all the copies out there in books, here on the forum, etc. etc. etc..

Thankyou Lisa for eliminating the silly accusations that people aren't who they say they are.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #422 on: January 17, 2006, 03:47:41 PM »
Setting aside the DNA question and returning to the queston of the photographs.

I have yet to find a photograph to match the one used by the technical person,  forget his name,  for the tv program.  When I asked if anyone knew which one was used,  I was given different examples.  None were the one the tech could have used.

When I asked about the original,  it was discovered no one we know has ever seen the original nor did anyone know of a copy which had NOT been retouched.  At this time, over on another thread,  we are discussing this problem.

It seems to me that if we don't know what the original photo of FS looked like then no one can make a comparision to AA or GD Anastasia or anyone else.

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #423 on: January 18, 2006, 10:27:55 AM »
Let me highlight what Greg told us:
>>As to the FS photo: All I can say is that there is no known unretouched version of it-the one posted here has been examined by a number of experts over the years and been shown to have been heavily drawn over, the hairline changed, the lips altered, etc., presumably to heighten the appearance to AA.  If we had an unretouched photo of FS it would be useful, but we don't. <<

No matter how many times posters tell us that they think they have an untouched copy of FS,  it evidently isn't an accurate statement.

Until we know we have an accurate copy of the original photo of FS,  then, and only then,  can we seriously discuss the similarities with the photos of FS to AA.

Until then,  how many more times will I have to repeat Greg's statement after certain posters try to tell us they have an untouched copy of FS???

How many more times will I have to ask for the names of their experts who tell them they have an untouched copy who have seen the original?

It may well be that when we see a certified copy of FS's original photo that it will be exactly like the one found in Summers and Mangold's book THE FILE ON THE TSAR only without the two white dots.  I have no idea.  But then, neither does anyone else, and, that is the problem in a "nut shell".

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

ConstanceMarie

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #424 on: January 18, 2006, 02:07:21 PM »
A.G.R. Bear, can you please explain to me where is the proof that the picture of Fransiska has or has not been retouched? It looks like to me that you are only reading just that one post. Maybe this person is wrong. What proof is there? Other posters here are telling us it does not look to be touched and it does not look touched to me. It does look old and fuzzy and maybe Xerox'd but nobody has done anything to change the way the face looks.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #425 on: January 18, 2006, 03:35:41 PM »
Quote
A.G.R. Bear, can you please explain to me where is the proof that the picture of Fransiska has or has not been retouched? It looks like to me that you are only reading just that one post. Maybe this person is wrong. What proof is there? Other posters here are telling us it does not look to be touched and it does not look touched to me. It does look old and fuzzy and maybe Xerox'd but nobody has done anything to change the way the face looks.


Good questions.

The post I quoted is from Greg King who wrote THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS, and,  Penny Wilson, the co-author of this book,  had confirmed this on her own posts.  This makes two people who have done a great deal of research into the lives of the Romanovs and Anna Anderson.

They have talked to experts.  No, I don't know who their experts were.

When I have asked others, like Annie and Helen, who claimed they had experts which tell us that the photographs they are presenting here on the forum have not been retouched,  they fall silent.  Why?  I can make assuptions but they should be the one who tell us why they have not.  Meanwhile,  Real Anastasia,  who has talked to her own experts whom she has named and given their backgrounds,  makes the same claim as Greg and Penny about the photos having been retouched.

 I've not talked to experts, however, I am an artist and know full well how photographs in the 1920s were retouched.  Perhaps that is why I am so bearish on this subject.

The original photo is owned by some private person who is no longer known after it's last sale.

Without a ceritified copy of the original,  I have no  idea if the changes were nothing more than it being copied off of bad copies  or if it was changed to look like AA.

And,  the reason I continue to repeat this is because some posters continue to tell you and others that they have a untouched copy of FS which is the one with the two white dots which may be from a white goo/paint which may have been used to altered this particular photo.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Annie

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #426 on: January 18, 2006, 03:43:02 PM »
Bear, if you are going to continue to rehash that quote, I will continue to rehash my photos.

OF COURSE pics were retouched in the 20's! The one on the right is retouched. The one on the left is not. Anyone can see nothing has been done to it.




I have been on this forum close to 3 years now. I remember when the post you keep quoting was made. At the time, I believed it, because all I had seen was the pic on the right. But later, I saw the one on the left, and I think it is incorrect to say there are no retouched photos because we can clearly see that there is. Perhaps he had not seen this pic at that time either. The pic may not be an original, it may be in bad shape, but it has not been doctored to alter its appearance, which is what 'retouched' means.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Annie »

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #427 on: January 18, 2006, 04:50:03 PM »
The one on the right is retouched.  I agree. ;D

See, Annie and I can agree on something  ::)

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Annie

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #428 on: January 18, 2006, 05:09:00 PM »
Ha, Bear, at last! :D

Does anyone know who retouched the pic on the right, when, and why? If they were trying to make it look more like AA, it actually makes it look less like her. They were probably just trying to fill in the washed out spots to what they think her features looked like. I would like to know who is responsible for it. Wasn't it in Gilliard's book. "Le Faux Anastasia"? Was that the only version, or were there more?

Grand_Duke_Paul

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #429 on: January 19, 2006, 10:38:45 AM »
Quote
Ha, Bear, at last! :D

Does anyone know who retouched the pic on the right, when, and why? If they were trying to make it look more like AA, it actually makes it look less like her. They were probably just trying to fill in the washed out spots to what they think her features looked like. I would like to know who is responsible for it. Wasn't it in Gilliard's book. "Le Faux Anastasia"? Was that the only version, or were there more?


If the original photo was in existance it probably would have surfaced before now.  The copies as I see them are so faded as to almost obscure her identity, and then the enhanced or altered ones seem to look farcical.
However in those days a technique was used tp give it the look of a charcoal portrait such as the altered versions we see.  I believe they used a white substance to alter the appearance or to make it look more portrait like, which was the desired result.  If they had to use the original photograph, then it is possible it was used for this, and maybe no longer in existence.

Annie

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #430 on: January 19, 2006, 10:47:34 AM »
Yes, that charcoal technique existed in the 1800's, I have several pics from that era of my ancestors that have been done that way, even colorized somehow. I see something was done to the pic on the right but the pic on the left looks like an ordinary old picture.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #431 on: January 19, 2006, 10:51:57 AM »
Quote

If the original photo was in existance it probably would have surfaced before now.  The copies as I see them are so faded as to almost obscure her identity, and then the enhanced or altered ones seem to look farcical.
However in those days a technique was used tp give it the look of a charcoal portrait such as the altered versions we see.  I believe they used a white substance to alter the appearance or to make it look more portrait like, which was the desired result.  If they had to use the original photograph, then it is possible it was used for this, and maybe no longer in existence.




At this time,  no one knows who owns the original which was sold, I believe, in the last few years.

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline RealAnastasia

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1890
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #432 on: January 21, 2006, 10:46:47 PM »
The statesment about the photos retouching is in the German Trial records (My sources are Alain Decaux, André Castelot -which are against AA claim- Peter Kurth and Dominique Auclères). If we read these records THERE AREN'T any unretouched pics of FS.

The results of the German Trials are clear enough: judges concluded that AA couldn't have been possibility FS. And they were doubters about AA being AN. The German Trials had an open end, but for judges AA was NOT FS. The possibility only came when the DNA results were known.

RealAnastasia.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2009, 03:58:31 PM by Alixz »

Annie

  • Guest
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #433 on: January 22, 2006, 09:35:58 AM »
Quote
The statesment about the photos retouching is in the German Trial records (My sources are Alain Decaux, André Castelot -which are againts AA claim- Peter Kurth and Dominique Auclères). If we read these records THERE AREN'T any unretouched pics of FS.


I am waiting for somebody to please show me where and how the faded pic is retouched. Just telling me it is doesn't mean a thing, it is obviously not.


Quote
The results of the German Trials are clear enough: judges concluded that AA couldn't have been possibily FS. And they were doubteous about AA being AN. The German Trials had an open end, but for judges AA was NOT FS.
RealAnastasia.


They never said she couldn't possibly be, only that it wasn't proven.

Quote
The possibility only came when the DNA results were known.


But this was no surprise, after all, they did seek out one of FS's relatives for a blood sample so surely they strongly suspected she was FS.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?
« Reply #434 on: January 22, 2006, 10:25:32 AM »
Quote

...[in part].....

The statesment about the photos retouching is in the German Trial records (My sources are Alain Decaux, André Castelot -which are againts AA claim- Peter Kurth and Dominique Auclères). If we read these records THERE AREN'T any unretouched pics of FS
....
RealAnastasia.


I suggest, Annie,  that you take your next vacation to Germany, look at the German Trial records with a good translator, so,  you can see for yourself  what these records tell you and they do tell us there is no untouched photographs of FS available, so,  this does includes the faded one you keep incorrectly stating is not retouched.

I regret that you can not understand this evidence.  It's not from Greg and Penny.  It's not from FILE ON THE TSAR.  It isn't from Peter Kurth or Lovell but words from the German Court trial.

You can't get DNA / mtDNA from a photograph so this need not be part of this conversation.  And,  even if you could,  you'd not find FS's DNA/mtDNA on any of the retouched versions.  Why?  It would be considered CONTAMINATED.

AGRBear  

 
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152