Topic: Concours Photo Gallery

[DKutz]

I was thinking last night that this site needs a photo gallery for each generation mustang, with pictures of correct finishes, decals, and assembly.  Right now you search, and often times there are no pictures.  Seems that if there were pictures of say a Correct 65 Mustang engine bay with it labeled as San jose with X build date, it would answer a lot of the repeat question that are brought up on this board...  Just a thought

[67gtasanjose]

I was thinking last night that this site needs a photo gallery for each generation mustang, with pictures of correct finishes, decals, and assembly.  Right now you search, and often times there are no pictures.  Seems that if there were pictures of say a Correct 65 Mustang engine bay with it labeled as San jose with X build date, it would answer a lot of the repeat question that are brought up on this board...  Just a thought

Although I understand your line of thinking, I fear too many "cookie-cutter" jobs would be the end result, there are far too many minor differences when the "whole picture" is added into the equation. Far too many options for far too many possible scenarios. Maybe to explain the vast amount of images needed to accomodate "everything" acurately could best be compared to the vintage article found in the Library about 67 Mustangs, the writer making reference to "Hamburgers" and having just the plain hamburger with mustard (say a straight six 3-speed coupe) or the super deluxe, everything on it hamburger (67 GT500 fully loaded)...and then there is EVERYTHING in between...and more than just one cook at only one hamburger stand!  There are far too many ways to photograph every hamburger ever dreamed up no less the countless ways that a vast majority of our Mustangs were each unique in their own way.

http://concoursmustang.com/speegle/67%20Mustang/Car%20Life%20-%201967-01.pdf

Although the way it is being done now seems rather repetative on certain topics, until a better way of doing it is presented, this method looks to be very good. I'm not sure what would happen should Jeff's vast knowledge and photograph collection were to be lost for good. Quite possible he has already taken that into consideration and has a plan in place but in reality, we should keep comparing our "hamburgers" to other "hamburgers" built the same time period and to let those who know more than just the casual observer would, direct the imaging as best needed for each individual request.

[CharlesTurner]

We have several thousand pics on the site, but not really separated out in any sense, the bulk being Member Galleries.  Click the 'Gallery' link above, or let me know if you don't see it.

[J_Speegle]

If we posted pictures of Concours cars then we would be responsible to post a list with each of what was incorrect or not current (rules and information is changing all the time)

This would not make allot of owners real happy - the reason magazines picture shots always include the same issues but never post what not to copy or do

If I was to post all of my pictures of unrestored car (as I am often asked) we would have the same problem since just about ever car has been played with somewhat. In response to questions I can often crop out that part or post a "don't copy this" comment.

I and others have posted pictures under specific headings "June 67 San Jose..." for example. But its not that easy to find allot of these cars, have a camera, permission and access but we try. At least in this way the search feature can be used - sorry if all of us have not found and submitted every version but thing we're kind of going for quality rather than coffee table version.

Overall if we could find original details for everything thing (year, plant model, every day and individual worker differences) with pictures it would be GREAT but we can't even collect and combine that same info into the printed words without pictures over the last 30 years. Believe your looking at a full time job for 30+ years a few times over - and that is if its very organized and nothing changes.

[69cobrajetrugae2]

The learning curve on these cars seems to accelerate instead of decelerating.

Once I am convinced that I know everything about how the factory assembled a particular component, then the reality sets in that sometimes, there are no easy answers. Preponderance of the evidence is required by the best of the best in the Mustang world.

They are here on concoursmustang.com and Cobrajet.org. Sometimes, rarely, even they get stumped on an issue.  Each question requires these Mustang Gods to do research to make sure that they get it right each and every time. I want to say thank you to them for keeping the dream alive, and for all their hard work to help us to get it right whenever possible.

[jwc66k]

If we posted pictures of Concours cars then we would be responsible to post a list with each of what was incorrect or not current (rules and information is changing all the time)

Which is part of the problem, knowing what is correct, and knowing what is not - for year, plant and time period. You learn more by your mistakes than by your successes. If you are worried about criticism, don't be. There are 50 years of mistakes to correct, don't back out now.
Jim

[WT8095]

The concerns about bulk posting of photos are absolutely valid - without interpretation people may jump to incorrect conclusions. And it would take years to caption each photo to try to capture what is currently known. I think Jeff's estimate of 30+ years full-time job is an UNDERestimation!

But what is the alternative? Thousands of photos that Jeff and others have collected over the years that never see the light of day? And all we are left with is what's floating around on the net today? In my opinion, having the largest possible data set is always preferable. Especially for those of us that do not have ready access to Mustang salvage yards (in MN anything in a yard is going to be a pile of rust anyway) to do our own research.

Note that I'm not suggesting that photos and other information should necessarily be free, either. I'm willing to pay for data, and those who have spent their valuable time collecting it deserve to be compensated.

[kowalski]

Which is part of the problem, knowing what is correct, and knowing what is not - for year, plant and time period. You learn more by your mistakes than by your successes. If you are worried about criticism, don't be. There are 50 years of mistakes to correct, don't back out now.
Jim

Well said, absolutely better to put the information out there, and put a few noses out of joint than to worry about any backlash.
The absolute best way to learn is to see the details first hand.

[67gtasanjose]

Well said, absolutely better to put the information out there, and put a few noses out of joint than to worry about any backlash.
The absolute best way to learn is to see the details first hand.

I learned early on to try and make every effort to NOT "finger-point" mistakes or misinformation as much as possible, instead to use wording that (hopefully) doesn't antagonize or possibly discredit another restorer (even though their opinion or advise may be incorrect currently or even in a older post). Many people's reputations as a restorer are on the line so using poor choice in wording even in jest, words that can damage somebody, that is a huge "No-no!"...even if your information is correct. Another Concours Mustang member suggested to me early on to try and use wording like..."The example I am working on, built (say San Jose) on such and such date has..." and to provide pictures whenever possible to support the information.

After all, OPINIONs...everybody has them...FACTS...few people have them all...but hopefully most of us are still "teachable".

Experience that dates back to the very oldest Mustangs will become less and less available over time as that information often goes with those who possess it to the grave. Places like this site will help, when provided by it's knowledgeable members liberally, will help to keep much of that knowledge  available for generations to come.

Thanks to all who help to accomplish this. I for one, REALLY appreciate what I have learned here.

[jwc66k]

I learned early on to try and make every effort to NOT "finger-point" mistakes or misinformation as much as possible, instead to use wording that (hopefully) doesn't antagonize or possibly discredit another restorer (even though their opinion or advise may be incorrect currently or even in a older post).
After all, OPINIONs...everybody has them...FACTS...few people have them all...but hopefully most of us are still "teachable".

Based on that, this forum would be better served to remove the entire section on "Showing & Judging". It would no longer be needed. I don't go to shows any more, it's been a long time since I crawled under a car with clipboard in hand to check the exhaust system against a standard. What I do on my cars now is for me.

Well said, absolutely better to put the information out there, and put a few noses out of joint than to worry about any backlash.

When a politically correct response is used so as to not offend someone, you usually wind up offending everyone. I'm on this forum to learn, and I also "lurk" on several other Mustang based forums reading posts and marveling at some of the bizarre answers to legitimate questions. I've contributed to this and other forums, I've learned from this and other forums, and I've posted my fair share of incorrect assumptions on this and other forums. A member's photos of what they think as concours correct using their own Mustangs benefit both them and others such as me. Pictures showing processes taken in a junk yard reveal techniques used 50 years ago. The intent is to apply those techniques to those 50 year old Mustangs. How do you know you got it correct unless someone points out the good and the bad?
Jim 

[67gtasanjose]

For what it's worth, my last comments were NOT directed towards anything primarily "JUDGED" but instead towards what is "found to be true" or "correct" on a presumably unrestored original vehicle, at least in the area of particular discussion in a thread, and then presenting such findings, if neccesary up against the popular belief, in a mannerism that is more or less "politically correct" in an effort to NOT offend. There will always be differences in opinion and I have also seen many occasions where a line of discussion might be slighted towards a persons own "opinion" and not exactly "facts". I generally will not "stand down" for the sake of "political correctness" if I feel my presentation has the merit to go to bat over.

Richard

[jwc66k]

For what it's worth, my last comments were NOT directed towards anything primarily "JUDGED" but instead towards what is "found to be true" or "correct" on a presumably unrestored original vehicle,... in a mannerism that is more or less "politically correct" in an effort to NOT offend.

In your zeal to be - "more or less "politically correct" " - you will cause more discontent than a flat out statement that says something specific. If it's correct - fine, if it's wrong - fine, but fix it. Blunt and to the point. There's nothing wrong with the truth.
Jim

[Toploader]

Overall if we could find original details for everything thing (year, plant model, every day and individual worker differences)

Is this really relevant?

[J_Speegle]

Is this really relevant?

Depends - there are people who are tracking this since the number of workers normally assigned to a specific station was limited and in some jobs it can identify who was possibly working and how things and how a certain process was likely preformed.  Case in point - 67 radiator support "scribes" has been a discussion on other forums. If course this might be an extreme in some opinions but I think even that points out that we all have different expectations.

Of course its up to each person to decide if something is relevant. For 20 plus years where a car was built wasn't relevant to MCA (just using this as an example)  and I think they/we missed out on allot of opportunities to document details in those early years as everything got lumped into one big pile with little attempt to relate findings with individual assembly plants.

[Toploader]

Thanks for the clarification.