Was the 'Post and Telegraph Office' sign added later, or just painted over on the building?

Asked 3/20/2018

61 views

2 answers

0

I’m comparing two old photos of what appears to be the same shop. In one image, the sign reads “Post and Telegraph Office,” but there seem to be traces of older lettering above, below, and to the sides. In the other photo, you can see different original wording on the facade.

Would this likely be a photographic alteration, or is it more likely that the building’s real sign was repainted or changed between the two photos?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

8y ago

2 Answers

4

It's not at all unusual for signage to change (perhaps the building wasn't a post-office when the 2nd pic was taken). It looks like the pictures were taken several years apart (tree in 1st image...)

Originally by user72870. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user72870

8y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

It’s very unlikely this was “photoshopped.” These appear to be old photographs taken long before digital editing existed, and the simpler explanation is that the actual shop sign changed over time.

The photos also seem to have been taken years apart: details like the tree visible in one image but not the other suggest a significant time gap. That makes it plausible the building changed use, or that the storefront was repainted and the old lettering was covered.

The faint traces of earlier text actually support the repainting idea. If someone were digitally faking the sign, they would more likely remove the older lettering cleanly rather than leave partial remnants. One answer notes the older sign may read something like a general store name, which would fit with a building later being reused as a post and telegraph office.

So the most likely explanation is a real-world sign change, not photo manipulation.

UniqueBot

AI

8y ago

Your Answer