PDA

View Full Version : Photo locations in ads



Dick Steinkamp
12-04-2006, 05:40 PM
Here's a '53 in front of the Arc de Triomphe de l'Étoile at the end of the Avenue des Champs Élysées in Paris.

http://static.flickr.com/103/314441919_6b1e1e8fec.jpg

(small caption in the lower right under the photo says "actual color photograph")



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

Dick Steinkamp
12-04-2006, 05:40 PM
Here's a '53 in front of the Arc de Triomphe de l'Étoile at the end of the Avenue des Champs Élysées in Paris.

http://static.flickr.com/103/314441919_6b1e1e8fec.jpg

(small caption in the lower right under the photo says "actual color photograph")



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

Scott
12-04-2006, 05:58 PM
I have a question, or maybe more than one. We know that the 1962 Hawk was photographed in front of a famous Roman fountain (by Bernini?), but how many other locations photographed for Studebaker ads can we identify? Does anyone know the building they photographed the 1966 Cruiser in front of? It's a hemicycle design.

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed before.

Scott
12-04-2006, 06:37 PM
Well, the background could be an actual photograph, but the car isn't - unless you count "extremely heavily retouched photo" as an actual photo! Nice shot, though.:)

Here's the 1966 ad I was talking about:
http://static.flickr.com/81/205221163_f45d963208.jpg?v=0

Scott
12-04-2006, 06:37 PM
Well, the background could be an actual photograph, but the car isn't - unless you count "extremely heavily retouched photo" as an actual photo! Nice shot, though.:)

Here's the 1966 ad I was talking about:
http://static.flickr.com/81/205221163_f45d963208.jpg?v=0

lstude
12-04-2006, 07:12 PM
quote: Well, the background could be an actual photograph, but the car isn't - unless you count "extremely heavily retouched photo" as an actual photo! Nice shot, though.

If it was one thing Studebaker's ad agency was good at, it was retouching! Take a look at these brochure pictures. I don't know where the backgrounds were taken. A lot of the factory photos were taken at the test track and at the house at the test track

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/55Studebakerbrochurecovercomparison.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52Studebakerbrochurecomparison.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-04-2006, 07:12 PM
quote: Well, the background could be an actual photograph, but the car isn't - unless you count "extremely heavily retouched photo" as an actual photo! Nice shot, though.

If it was one thing Studebaker's ad agency was good at, it was retouching! Take a look at these brochure pictures. I don't know where the backgrounds were taken. A lot of the factory photos were taken at the test track and at the house at the test track

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/55Studebakerbrochurecovercomparison.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52Studebakerbrochurecomparison.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

Randy_G
12-04-2006, 07:26 PM
I have to say that they do not look like actual photo's of car or people to me, they look like the Advertising Dept had some very talented artist that drew the ads in color since color photograph's in Magazine's were none existant. If I'm wrong, it wont be the first time, its just how it looks to me.


http://www.automotivehistoryonline.com/59s2.jpg
www.AutomotiveHistoryOnline.com

Randy_G
12-04-2006, 07:26 PM
I have to say that they do not look like actual photo's of car or people to me, they look like the Advertising Dept had some very talented artist that drew the ads in color since color photograph's in Magazine's were none existant. If I'm wrong, it wont be the first time, its just how it looks to me.


http://www.automotivehistoryonline.com/59s2.jpg
www.AutomotiveHistoryOnline.com

lstude
12-04-2006, 08:58 PM
quote: I have to say that they do not look like actual photo's of car or people to me, they look like the Advertising Dept had some very talented artist that drew the ads in color since color photograph's in Magazine's were none existant. If I'm wrong, it wont be the first time, its just how it looks to me.


I don't know how these ads were done, so I may be wrong, too, but I would guess that a photograph was made and then colored and retouched. You can usually tell if it is a drawing because the artists usually exaggerated the details like they did on the 58 ads. Below are a factory photo and a drawing of the 58 wagon.

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/58Studebakerwagoncomparison.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-04-2006, 08:58 PM
quote: I have to say that they do not look like actual photo's of car or people to me, they look like the Advertising Dept had some very talented artist that drew the ads in color since color photograph's in Magazine's were none existant. If I'm wrong, it wont be the first time, its just how it looks to me.


I don't know how these ads were done, so I may be wrong, too, but I would guess that a photograph was made and then colored and retouched. You can usually tell if it is a drawing because the artists usually exaggerated the details like they did on the 58 ads. Below are a factory photo and a drawing of the 58 wagon.

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/58Studebakerwagoncomparison.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

Scott
12-04-2006, 09:10 PM
It's a little off-topic, but wasn't there a decision by U.S. courts, or some government action back in the late 1950s or early 1960 that made it illegal for auto companies to distort the proportions and other details of cars in their ads? I'm quite sure there was some regulation or something that changed how cars were drawn for sales purposes. It fell under the heading of false advertizing.

Scott
12-04-2006, 09:10 PM
It's a little off-topic, but wasn't there a decision by U.S. courts, or some government action back in the late 1950s or early 1960 that made it illegal for auto companies to distort the proportions and other details of cars in their ads? I'm quite sure there was some regulation or something that changed how cars were drawn for sales purposes. It fell under the heading of false advertizing.

lstude
12-04-2006, 09:31 PM
I don't know of any law, but there may have been. The pictures below are not a Studebaker ad but are from the Dec. 57 issue of Look Magazine. They drew all the 58 makes. The proportions are almost laughable!:D:D
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/58StudebakerPackardLookMagDec57a.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-04-2006, 09:31 PM
I don't know of any law, but there may have been. The pictures below are not a Studebaker ad but are from the Dec. 57 issue of Look Magazine. They drew all the 58 makes. The proportions are almost laughable!:D:D
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/58StudebakerPackardLookMagDec57a.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

56H-Y6
12-05-2006, 07:00 AM
Hi
Leonard
"....the proportions laughable"? I'd say much more appealing!!!!! Sure makes the dumpy real profile of the '58 look hugely better. Maybe if the real cars had been so proportioned, they would have sold better.
In general, it was common advertising industry practice to "improve" the the car proportions for the print advertising. There was a good article in Car Classics magazine years ago by one of the fellows who worked in the business, detailing how it was done.

The major changes they made were to add length between the front wheel house and front door line (note the additional length in that area on the yellow '55 President shown above), tuck the front and rear wheels housing and/or wheels up, lower rooflines, lengthen through the doors and especially the rear quarter lengths. It was a cut-and-paste process, air brush, touch up the photos, worked great in the days before Photoshop and other retouch software.

The improvements in photo techniques and production, resulting in lower cost versus the cost of individual hand drawn art of cars, ended that period for the most part. Exceptions such as those wonderful Pontiac ads in the Sixties come to mind, there may have been regulation but I think it was just a matter of production cost that ended the old practices.

Steve

56H-Y6
12-05-2006, 07:00 AM
Hi
Leonard
"....the proportions laughable"? I'd say much more appealing!!!!! Sure makes the dumpy real profile of the '58 look hugely better. Maybe if the real cars had been so proportioned, they would have sold better.
In general, it was common advertising industry practice to "improve" the the car proportions for the print advertising. There was a good article in Car Classics magazine years ago by one of the fellows who worked in the business, detailing how it was done.

The major changes they made were to add length between the front wheel house and front door line (note the additional length in that area on the yellow '55 President shown above), tuck the front and rear wheels housing and/or wheels up, lower rooflines, lengthen through the doors and especially the rear quarter lengths. It was a cut-and-paste process, air brush, touch up the photos, worked great in the days before Photoshop and other retouch software.

The improvements in photo techniques and production, resulting in lower cost versus the cost of individual hand drawn art of cars, ended that period for the most part. Exceptions such as those wonderful Pontiac ads in the Sixties come to mind, there may have been regulation but I think it was just a matter of production cost that ended the old practices.

Steve

Scott
12-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?

Scott
12-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?

Studedude1961
12-05-2006, 09:57 AM
The artist's renderings are very interesting. As a kid, long before I saw an actual 1958 Packard and judging from the front end drawing of the famed "Everywhere You Go People Know Packard" ads that appeared in National Geographic, I pictured Packards as being very much like 1957-1958 Chryslers. The long, low look of course is what the artist was aiming for so the rather upright tacked on lines of some of the Studebaker products had to be highly exaggerated.

Studedude1961
--1963 Cruiser

Studedude1961
12-05-2006, 09:57 AM
The artist's renderings are very interesting. As a kid, long before I saw an actual 1958 Packard and judging from the front end drawing of the famed "Everywhere You Go People Know Packard" ads that appeared in National Geographic, I pictured Packards as being very much like 1957-1958 Chryslers. The long, low look of course is what the artist was aiming for so the rather upright tacked on lines of some of the Studebaker products had to be highly exaggerated.

Studedude1961
--1963 Cruiser

lstude
12-05-2006, 10:31 AM
quote: Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?
I can ask Richard Quinn, he seems to have a infinate knowledge of anything Studebaker. It doesn't look like any house that would be built around South Bend. The houses on one of the other 66 postcards looks more like something in Indiana. The house looks like it would be on the west coast. There is an Avanti post card that looks like it was taken near the Grand Canyon

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66Studebakerfactorycardbyhouses.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Avantipostcardindesert.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-05-2006, 10:31 AM
quote: Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?
I can ask Richard Quinn, he seems to have a infinate knowledge of anything Studebaker. It doesn't look like any house that would be built around South Bend. The houses on one of the other 66 postcards looks more like something in Indiana. The house looks like it would be on the west coast. There is an Avanti post card that looks like it was taken near the Grand Canyon

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66Studebakerfactorycardbyhouses.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Avantipostcardindesert.jpg


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

Scott
12-05-2006, 10:37 AM
Hmm, that looks more like Bryce canyon.

Scott
12-05-2006, 10:37 AM
Hmm, that looks more like Bryce canyon.

Dick Steinkamp
12-05-2006, 10:43 AM
quote:Originally posted by Scott

Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?


It looks like something Frank Lloyd Wright might have done, but looking through pictures of his stuff, it doesn't match anything I could find. Perhaps it's just a random good looking house (resturant?).



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

Dick Steinkamp
12-05-2006, 10:43 AM
quote:Originally posted by Scott

Getting back to the topic, does anyone know where the 1966 ad photo was taken?


It looks like something Frank Lloyd Wright might have done, but looking through pictures of his stuff, it doesn't match anything I could find. Perhaps it's just a random good looking house (resturant?).



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

Scott
12-05-2006, 10:46 AM
I had the same thought about Frank Llloyd Wright. He did design some similarly shaped houses, but none look quite like this. I think this is a public building of some kind because it looks like there is a label or sign on a door on the ground level. Could it be a restroom?

Scott
12-05-2006, 10:46 AM
I had the same thought about Frank Llloyd Wright. He did design some similarly shaped houses, but none look quite like this. I think this is a public building of some kind because it looks like there is a label or sign on a door on the ground level. Could it be a restroom?

63larkcustom
12-05-2006, 03:41 PM
Not sure, but the 66 picture looks like the the Corpus Christi neighborhood in South Bend where I grew up.

Bob Sporner
Palm Springs, California

63larkcustom
12-05-2006, 03:41 PM
Not sure, but the 66 picture looks like the the Corpus Christi neighborhood in South Bend where I grew up.

Bob Sporner
Palm Springs, California

Dick Steinkamp
12-05-2006, 03:48 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scott
Could it be a restroom?


Probably not with all that glass ;)


(but then each to his own :))



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

Dick Steinkamp
12-05-2006, 03:48 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scott
Could it be a restroom?


Probably not with all that glass ;)


(but then each to his own :))



http://static.flickr.com/100/301465853_2dbe07b7c6_m.jpg
Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

lstude
12-05-2006, 04:30 PM
I asked Stu Chapman where it was taken and here is his answer:

Hello Leonard.
This picture was shot, under my supervision, at the Teahouse located on the premises of the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton, Ontario. There were three other pictures shot that same week at other Hamilton locations. If you locate these post cards and copy me I can identify them as well.
Stu


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-05-2006, 04:30 PM
I asked Stu Chapman where it was taken and here is his answer:

Hello Leonard.
This picture was shot, under my supervision, at the Teahouse located on the premises of the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton, Ontario. There were three other pictures shot that same week at other Hamilton locations. If you locate these post cards and copy me I can identify them as well.
Stu


Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

Scott
12-05-2006, 04:54 PM
Well, how about that! I was right; it is a public place. Here's a link to a movie on the official website of the botanical garden. The movie pans around and then shows the building. There's another movie showing the inside, too. Now that would be an interesting venue for a chapter meeting!

http://www.a2d.ca/rbg/rock/tourviewer_rocktour.html

Scott
12-05-2006, 04:54 PM
Well, how about that! I was right; it is a public place. Here's a link to a movie on the official website of the botanical garden. The movie pans around and then shows the building. There's another movie showing the inside, too. Now that would be an interesting venue for a chapter meeting!

http://www.a2d.ca/rbg/rock/tourviewer_rocktour.html

raprice
12-05-2006, 05:38 PM
This is a fascinating thread.
Artist renderings were very common back in the '50s and '60s. Almost always they made the cars look longer and sleeker. Not just Studebakers, but all makes.
It was all to get those people into the showrooms. It probably worked, even though people really knew that the pictures were enhanced.
Rog

'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

raprice
12-05-2006, 05:38 PM
This is a fascinating thread.
Artist renderings were very common back in the '50s and '60s. Almost always they made the cars look longer and sleeker. Not just Studebakers, but all makes.
It was all to get those people into the showrooms. It probably worked, even though people really knew that the pictures were enhanced.
Rog

'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

showbizkid
12-05-2006, 06:12 PM
There was an article in the first issue of Motor Trend Classic where Art Fitzpatrick, the guy who drew all those Pontiac magazine ads through the 1960s, talks about taking pictures of the actual cars, then cutting them apart and spreading the pieces out to make them longer and wider, and using these "floating jigsaws" as his models for the finished artwork. You gotta love it!

There was no legislation about automobile art, BTW. You're probably thinking of the "truth in advertising" case that was directed against Campbell's Soup in the late '60s; their ad agency photographed a bowl of Chunky Soup after putting glass marbles in the bottom of the bowl to force the meat to the top ;) That led to some laws, but nothing specific about cars.


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard
http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

showbizkid
12-05-2006, 06:12 PM
There was an article in the first issue of Motor Trend Classic where Art Fitzpatrick, the guy who drew all those Pontiac magazine ads through the 1960s, talks about taking pictures of the actual cars, then cutting them apart and spreading the pieces out to make them longer and wider, and using these "floating jigsaws" as his models for the finished artwork. You gotta love it!

There was no legislation about automobile art, BTW. You're probably thinking of the "truth in advertising" case that was directed against Campbell's Soup in the late '60s; their ad agency photographed a bowl of Chunky Soup after putting glass marbles in the bottom of the bowl to force the meat to the top ;) That led to some laws, but nothing specific about cars.


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard
http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

lstude
12-05-2006, 06:24 PM
Nobody would ever believe in the 50s and 60s that the popular vehicles today would be so tall that you needed running boards to get into them. If you had showed someone at Studebaker this Avanti Studebaker XUV brochure, and told them that this is what had the Studebaker name on it in 2004, I am sure they wouldn't believe you.

I did advertising for A&P Food Stores from 1967 to 1976 and we also used marbles in soup to make it look chunky, shaving cream for whipped cream because the whipped cream melted in the lights and we would soak a turkey in vegetable oil for 24 hours so it would look juicy when it was carved in front of the camera.
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/StudebakerXUVbrochure1.jpg

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-05-2006, 06:24 PM
Nobody would ever believe in the 50s and 60s that the popular vehicles today would be so tall that you needed running boards to get into them. If you had showed someone at Studebaker this Avanti Studebaker XUV brochure, and told them that this is what had the Studebaker name on it in 2004, I am sure they wouldn't believe you.

I did advertising for A&P Food Stores from 1967 to 1976 and we also used marbles in soup to make it look chunky, shaving cream for whipped cream because the whipped cream melted in the lights and we would soak a turkey in vegetable oil for 24 hours so it would look juicy when it was carved in front of the camera.
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/StudebakerXUVbrochure1.jpg

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-06-2006, 03:53 AM
I received more information on the other 66 Studebaker post cards from Stu Chapman.

The shot of the Cruiser and Commander were taken at a residence on Ashland Avenue in Burlington, Ontario. just a couple of blocks from where we lived then. Ironically, it turned out that the owner of that house became a tennis friend years later and his son-in-law is a senior police officer with the local force. The Wagonaire shot was also taken at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton in an area known as the Arboretum I believe. The tent belonged to the Chapman family and the Coleman props were ours also. There is a fourth picture in the series and it is of a Cruiser I recollect and was taken on the front lawn of the Royal Hamilton Yacht Club overlooking Burlington Bay. The shot of the Avanti is unknown to me.
Stu

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66Studebakerfactorycardbyhouses.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66StudebakerWagonairepostcard.jpg

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-06-2006, 03:53 AM
I received more information on the other 66 Studebaker post cards from Stu Chapman.

The shot of the Cruiser and Commander were taken at a residence on Ashland Avenue in Burlington, Ontario. just a couple of blocks from where we lived then. Ironically, it turned out that the owner of that house became a tennis friend years later and his son-in-law is a senior police officer with the local force. The Wagonaire shot was also taken at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton in an area known as the Arboretum I believe. The tent belonged to the Chapman family and the Coleman props were ours also. There is a fourth picture in the series and it is of a Cruiser I recollect and was taken on the front lawn of the Royal Hamilton Yacht Club overlooking Burlington Bay. The shot of the Avanti is unknown to me.
Stu

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66Studebakerfactorycardbyhouses.jpg
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/66StudebakerWagonairepostcard.jpg

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

tstclr
12-06-2006, 05:55 AM
That's quite a gap on that left rear door of the Wagonaire!
Todd


63 Lark 2dr Sedan
64 Daytona 4dr Sedan

tstclr
12-06-2006, 05:55 AM
That's quite a gap on that left rear door of the Wagonaire!
Todd


63 Lark 2dr Sedan
64 Daytona 4dr Sedan

Scott
12-06-2006, 09:03 AM
Thanks lstude! I'm glad Stu was able to answer those questions. I found it very interesting that the Tea House really hasn't changed at all on the outside in 40 years. The only difference I see is more plants trailing over the terrace edge.

I think the Cruiser shot Stu is thinking of is the green Daytona with the black top that was photographed near water with boats in the background. They're all nice shots. I kind of wish we could have one of them reproduced on the inside cover of a TW sometime.

Scott
12-06-2006, 09:03 AM
Thanks lstude! I'm glad Stu was able to answer those questions. I found it very interesting that the Tea House really hasn't changed at all on the outside in 40 years. The only difference I see is more plants trailing over the terrace edge.

I think the Cruiser shot Stu is thinking of is the green Daytona with the black top that was photographed near water with boats in the background. They're all nice shots. I kind of wish we could have one of them reproduced on the inside cover of a TW sometime.

lstude
12-06-2006, 04:16 PM
It would be great if somebody who lives near Hamilton could take a Studebaker and photograph it by the tea house or the house on Ashland Ave. in Burlington (if it is still there)

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg

lstude
12-06-2006, 04:16 PM
It would be great if somebody who lives near Hamilton could take a Studebaker and photograph it by the tea house or the house on Ashland Ave. in Burlington (if it is still there)

Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/Mein64Daytonasm.jpghttp://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l288/lstude/52inyardsm-1.jpg