Taxidermy history

[CrabCrazy]

I know Jonas Bros did a lot of clay sculpts and plaster molds, which they layered rosin paper in....when they started, it was wrapped with the natural deer skulls...i would guess in there early days, they would have used built up wooden and wrapped assemblys or used hardware cloth over the wooden assemblys

i did have a picture of coleman jonas in his small shop, before the big one later on...I know the Guy Jonas did fish, but never seen a picture of any of his work

[John Bellucci]

know what you mean John....I have some old black and white  pics of some big mounts they were using wodd lath nailed onto a wooden armature and excelsior to wrap detail and legs..real skulls  .looks like skin was put right on this mannikin....not casted....would you know who did this? the jonas brothers maybe?

Well, that method was developed and "perfected" by William T. Hornaday.  I have similar photos as well, showing Hornaday working on a Tiger mannikin using this very method.  In fact, the method was illustrated in his books on Taxidermy that were lifted for the Northwestern School of Taxidermy, right down to the illustrations!  It was one of the major methods used by progressive Taxidermists, and was a step up from stuffing.

P.T. Barnum's 'Jumbo' was done similarly, except young Carl covered the mannikin with - I believe - a reinforced clay.  The freshly mounted and dried Jumbo looked fantastic, but years down the line, as the skin expanded and relaxed, the detail underneath began to shift as clay will do in large amounts, and loose it's 'fresh' lifelike appearance.  It's too bad it was lost to a fire.  Imagine if it were still around today?

When Akeley did the Horses for the Columbian Exposition in 1893, he set up the armatures with the bones and lumber, but this time sculpted the mannikin anatomy using reinforced Plaster, thinking it would last longer than the clay.  Alas, the plaster beneath the skin began cracking after a few years, and the beautiful anatomy began to sag.  This was known as the "direct sculpture" of mannikin construction.  It was later used by John Rowley, with an improved modeling composition, using Plaster as its base, with other additives to strengthen and retard the Plaster, to thus prevent cracking.  Even though this method was acceptable, and used by the likes of Leon Pray it fell by the wayside, though the Klipspringer group and others created by Pray and Akeley at Field Museum, are still on exhibit today.  The mounts however are very heavy!

Akeley finally hit upon sculpting the anatomy over the skeleton in clay, then molding the sculpture with multi part reinforced Plaster molds, and laying up plaster reinforced burlap and muslin in the mold interior, to create a lightweight hollow mannikin.  This was further reinforced with a lightweight but durable wooden lathe framework, the parts were assembled, sized or sealed with Shellac, and prepared to accept the skin.

Early headforms and mannikins had none of the facial detail that everyone cannot live without today.  Taxidermists of a bygone era knew how to create nostrils and facial details with clay.  That's why old headforms and mannikins appear crude to those who do not know any better.

But they all can trace their origins back to the method Carl Akeley developed and truly perfected.  In fact, in regards to Elephant Taxidermy, Robert Rockwell and Louis Paul Jonas - both of whom were taught by Carl Akeley personally - further developed Carl's methods for Elephants.  They simply made it a bit more efficient, resulting in lighter weight Elephant mounts ... if one can imagine such a thing!

Our history is rich, and to dismiss those who paved the way for the rest of us is really uncalled for, and pretty much unforgivable!

[michael p.]

know what you mean John....I have some old black and white  pics of some big mounts they were using wodd lath nailed onto a wooden armature and excelsior to wrap detail and legs..real skulls  .looks like skin was put right on this mannikin....not casted....would you know who did this? the jonas brothers maybe?

Well, that method was developed and "perfected" by William T. Hornaday.  I have similar photos as well, showing Hornaday working on a Tiger mannikin using this very method.  In fact, the method was illustrated his books on Taxidermy that were lifted for the Northwestern School of Taxidermy, right down to the illustrations!  It was one of the major methods used by progressive Taxidermists, and was a step up from stuffing.

P.T. Barnum's 'Jumbo' was done similarly, except young Carl covered the mannikin with - I believe - a reinforced clay.  The freshly mounted and dried Jumbo looked fantastic, but years down the line, as the skin expanded and relaxed, the detail underneath began to shift as clay will do in large amounts, and loose it's 'fresh' lifelike appearance.  It's too bad it was lost to a fire.  Imagine if it were still around today?

When Akeley did the Horses for the Columbian Exposition in 1893, he set up the armatures with the bones and lumber, but this time sculpted the mannikin anatomy using reinforced Plaster, thinking it would last longer than the clay.  Alas, the plaster beneath the skin began cracking after a few years, and the beautiful anatomy began to sag.  This was known as the "direct sculpture" of mannikin construction.  It was later used by John Rowley, with an improved modeling compesition, using Plaster as its base, with other additives to strengthen and retard the Plaster, to thus prevent cracking.  Even though this method was acceptable, and used by the likes of Leon Pray it fell by the wayside, though the Klipspringer group and others created by Pray and Akeley at Field Museum, are still on exhibit today.  The mounts however are very heavy!

Akeley finally hit upon sculpting the anatomy over the skeleton in clay, then molding the sculpture with multi part reinforced Plaster molds, and laying up plaster reinforced burlap and muslin in the mold interior, to create a lightweight hollow mannikin.  This was further reinforced with a lightweight but durable wooden lathe framework, the parts were assembled, sized or sealed with Shellac, and prepared to accept the skin.

Early headforms and mannikins had none of the facial detail that everyone cannot live without today.  Taxidermists of a bygone era knew how to create nostrils and facial details with clay.  That's why old headforms and mannikins appear crude to those who do not know any better.

But they all can trace their origins back to the method Carl Akeley developed and truly perfected.  In fact, in regards to Elephant Taxidermy, Robert Rockwell and Louis Paul Jonas - both of whom were taught by Carl Akeley personally - further developed Carl's methods for Elephants.  They simply made it a bit more efficient, resulting in lighter weight Elephant mounts ... if one can imagine such a thing!

Our history is rich, and to dismiss those who paved the way for the rest of us is really uncalled for, and pretty much unforgivable!

A sincere THANK YOU for that.

[double barrel]

Apoligizing to Jon Bellucki for not using pellcrekc, spillcreck, whatever.Who cares, like so many on here you have a talent for taking something completely off topic and talking about something else. We ain't talking about elephrants  and hourses you moron, were talking bout why they didn't have no deer forms that were worth a chit back then. If Prey did sculp some goodens why didn't they mass market them?
  In todays world we call somebody a hack if their work is just a little off. For decades taxis mounted over excelsior and the paper forms that were out ther werent worth a dern.
   Now, I didn't try and discredit your heros, I admire them too, But IMO if they gave a damn about "THe Industry", they would have put some good deer forms on the ,market.
   All I said was the 4 guys mentioned and alot more living today done 100 times more that all those guys put together. I didnt say they mounted more horses or better elephants I said they did more to help the industry.
  Doggonnet I fergot to do spell check. Before you critisize me for my spelling and not reading enough you need to learn to comprehend what you read first.

[double barrel]

Jon ,I went back and read your words agin, I can't believe your can be so educated and stupid at the same time.
   #1 I did not speak ill of the masters.
    B. I did not say Eckley "didn't do any commercial werk"
    And 3. "after the golden age taxidermy went to the crapper?
   How would these guys stand up in todays world? We have thousands of taxis turning out good work today, and they can't spend weeks on a mount because you have to get it done to get paid. Thanks to people like Mr. Polytranspar, Mr. Breakthru, Mr WASCO, world taxi championships. Look at what this site alone has done for the industry. Brought millions into taxi, great for advertising, learning , sharing experiences, making friends, arguing with dumbasses like you, just kidding. I know your skill level john, just the other day I was looking at a Breakthrough from 20 years back and you took #3 in the world I believe it was. At least I think that was you. Whatever happened to Dawn Crews, she had #2, is she still taxi-ing? John, your photography is second to none.
   Enjoyed arguing with you, sorry I called you a stupid moron, I learned that from George.

[George Roof]

HEY, How'd I get into this.

Doublebarrel, you problem is you're refusing to accept "HISTORY" in it's correct context. It's like trying to say that Babe Ruth would be able to put up the same numbers as Alex Rodriquez- it's a pipe dream out of context.
 
The "golden age" of taxidermy is right now. Akeley worked in the golden age of enlightenment. Pieces of art were readily distinguishable from POS. Museums were in their heyday as people did not have National Geographic and Headline News to view all the wonders outside the small podunk towns and villages they lived in. Every day there was a new discovery. Yet if Akeley or Hornaday lived today, they'd still be exceptional taxidermists.

Their work was so unique simply because they didn't have the mediums to work in that we have so readily today.  We call McKenzie and have it delivered to our doorsteps in 3 days, Akeley had to send a passenger pigeon and hope that he'd get it in the next year OR he improvised with what he had available.  Your trying to play it down is like trying to say that the Mona Lisa and Venus de Milo aren't exquisit representations of people who lived at that time. Because they could sculpt still didn't give them the medium to reproduce those works.  Armatures had to be built and animals were sculpted on stationary forms with the intent of a ONE TIME USE.  The elephants are phenomenal when you look at the old pictures where the head was mounted separately and then hung with a gantry much like you'd hang an aircraft engine on a wing today.

We still have artisans today who are capable of that kind of mastery, but they're fewer and farther between because we've become a civilization of gasoline asses who insist on wanting it NOW. Akeley's museum work was painstaking and even the bark and leaves on the tree in his dioramas are perfect replications of the environment the animal lived in. Today, most taxidermists would throw a ficus tree in there and pretend it fit. Akeley molded and sculpted each leave individually.  Who do you know who'd take that kind of time and interest?

I was noting those nutty birdbrains in another post talking about how many inches long a turkey bone is. Well, to me it's nutty because I'm not that particular about being a few silly millimeters off as long as the representation and presentation is good.  However, Akeley was just like the birdbrains.  His mounts are anatomically accurate down to the nth degree. The majority of taxidermist today are nothing more than "craftsmen" and some of them aren't very good at it. When you refer back to the "masters", they were truly artists first and taxidermists secondly as the skin was simply a "covering" to their art.

[michael p.]

Damn George, between you and John, this case is closed.  Well put gentleman, well put

[byrdman]

John and George....nice!

[CrabCrazy]

and that concludes our program for today

[double barrel]

That was one of the best posts I've read from George, thanks. But still , all you and John said combined was talk about how talented these guys were, agreed. I'm talking about the industry as a whole, not museam work, not artists' talents. How bought Tohickon eyes, did that guy do anything to help the industry? When Bob W. started Breakthrough, did that help the "struggling taxis who were trying to improve so they could get better at it?" Taxis today that are already doing good work go and study under Bill or Rick, are they trying to improve their level of work? Millions who watch dvds and read B.T., are they trying to improve? All these learning tools wouldn't be here if it wasn't for certain people, and while the masters were blowing us away with their beautiful creations, taxis all over the world were boiling sculls and wrapping wood wool manikins, ruinning trophy deer.
Did Matt Thompson help the industry by sculpting or casting his fish line? Polytranspar? Dennis Beins forms, selling by the millions, I guess, does he need to be even mentioned? This site? A newcommer can get on line and read and mount his first deer with his first attempt and it looks better than alot of the deer done back then by professional shops.I'm not trying to discredit the masters, I love em. In todays world, I don't think they would be fast enough. I might be wrong but they probably took weeks to mount an elephant, making it all from scratch. To mount a deer today in a comm. shop, it's all laid out for you, just snappit together but they, by being the caliber of artists they were, probably would want every mt. perfect, and spend too much time on them. I guess they could charge 1500 a mount and snag the wealthy customers.With all the snaptogether stuff we have today, we still never stop learning new methods anyway.New products every day and people still wanting more. Do you really believe if whats his name hadn't have sculpted clay over plaster or wire armature, some body else wouldn't have come up with the idea?When they left their shops and went home did they not see all the sory looking mounts hanging in homes and the local sporting good store and say, dang it, somethings gotta be done. I think I'll use my vast knowlege and sculpting skills and try and sculp a nice line of forms.Not only does the industry need it but maybe I can make some money off of it. This whole thing started when I ask what was the best selling form in the world, WT deer , that is? If McKenzies is the biggest and fastest growing company and if dennis's forms sell the most,IF I said,then hasn't he done more to help and promote the industry than some body doing a diorama for a museam? I didn't say nothing bad about them. The history section is under the tax. ind. section, and modern history is a part of history. WASCO, Breakthrough, PolyT.,are what, 25 years old or so? How bout dan C., no he didn't do nothing for the industry, forget I even mentioned it.I was just trying to start a discussion, with 4 feet of snow piled up at my door I didn't see anything wrong with it. I know, we can talk about the game or something we all just saw on tv last nite. I got it, lets talk about how sorry obama is.LOL

[double barrel]

Who was the dumbazz that said taxi-net was a watering hole? A W. H. is a nice place you come to to quinch your thirst ,enjoy, relax. This is more like a colliseaum you come to to fight your battles. Too many sharpe tongues waiting to tomahawk you. I usually wait on the namecalling until somebody else draws first blood.I thank I'm gonna go ahead and cut my typing finger off and put an end to this chit.

[michael p.]

Bipolarism is an integral part of this industry.........

[PA]

George and John ( and Paul and Ringo), I can't believe you got sucked into this discussion with someone who doesn't have a clue how technology and innovation in all fields develop. The kinds of statements he makes are equivalent in my mind to:

Boy, Henry Ford was a terribly stupid guy. He couldn't build a race car that drove 180 miles and hour, and not only that he used people on his assembly lines instead of Robots. The engineers today at Ford did LOTS more than Henry ever did.

And Alexander Graham Bell - sheesh! His phone system sucked compared to today. You can call all over the world and he was having trouble calling into the next room. Besides his early cylinder phonograph - why didn't he invent digital recording that can store thousands of recordings on a device the size of a thumb.

There are thousands of other inventors who are just plain stupid in their innovations of 120 years ago. Why didn't they have nuclear power, why didn't people go to the moon instead of inventing steam powered river vessels.

Some people kids...

[John Bellucci]

Holy crap!  I never put our names together like that before!  LOL! 

Thank you for the levity!