Looks the same, but the grade seems to be off. They look like they are standing above the road quite a bit.

And the neighborhood changed a little with all those bars on the windows!

I think the scale looks off. The courtyard opening looks wider in the second pic.

Not a chance. The first building is much taller. Look at the person standing in front of both places. Also, I don't believe that anyone would spend the kind of money it took to completely re-face the front for less (& different) windows, not to mention leveling off the tower roofs.
Steve

I reckon there's a 90% chance it is. Grade would have been increased by maybe 1ft since that picture was taken back when that was more than likely a dirt road and the person in the old picture was more than likely shorter than this guy and he is close to the building giving the illusion of it being bigger. The only think that makes me think it aint is the basement windows but they could have easy been added after.

Whats the story behind both pics. I'm interested

I don't think so.

The ratios between the widths of the wings and the courtyards are around 1.7:1 in the newer pic, but @ 2.1:1 in the older.

The wings in the older picture are 21 roof-tiles wide, but only 16 tiles wide in the newer (do tiles really vary that much in width?).

The orientation of the shadows are different. These could, of course, have been taken at different times of the day, but both seem to have afternoon rather than morning light? (That argument is weak...)

The towers are bumped out in the older version, flat in the newer. Why would anyone want to pay money to obliterate character?

Stuck home on a snow day with the kids... Too much time on my hands. I should go sledding:thumbsup:.

Probably a silly question, but is the newer one located "1 block north of Vernon & 1 block east of Main?"

That would also be my opinion

stp57 said:

Not a chance. The first building is much taller.

Click to expand...

Same style, yes. Maybe the same builder and/or architect. But I don't think it's the same house.

Look at the old pix. The columns on the corners extend out further than the wall with the windows. Not so in the modern image.

Also, it appears that the new image shows either windows or grates for crawl-space access that is not in the old pix.

The grade is level from left to right in the new pic. It slopes down to the right in the older pic. If it's the same house they would have to have added dirt up against the house on the right side of the new pic. Most people are not going to push a foot or two of dirt up against the house if they are re-grading the lot.

Alright thanks, the story behind it is it's a duplex my great grandfather built in Los Angeles. So last time I was in the area, I went out to see if I could find it. That's me in the new picture, and that's him in the old one. He was probably quite a bit shorter than me is why the building looks taller in the old one. I was pretty convinced it was the same because of the street, I found it on Woodland Ave. which is a block east of Main, and I think it was a block and a half north of Vernon.

I'm still uncertain if it's the same house though, either it's the same or they tore it down and built another one just like it right next to it. But seems to me it's the same, a lot of things could have changed over 90 years. The windows could have been changed for security, there's a lot of crime in Los Angeles now. I didn't notice the towers sticking out before, maybe the roof leaked and had some water damage, so they tore them out and re-did them. Flat roofs weren't that reliable back then.

As far as the grade, maybe they regraded it some when they re-did the old sidewalk and poured an asphalt road. The ratios of the wings and the courtyard opening do look different. But maybe that's an illusion being the new one has a wall in front of it. And they might have moved the towers over if they were re-done, looks like they were sticking out in the courtyard in the old one, and flush to the building in the new one.

One thing that kind of convinces me it's the same though is the tree. The tree stump off to the side is in the exact same place as the tree in the old picture. What are the odds of them building another house just like it with a tree in the exact same place, and on the same road?

Didn't even notice the tree stump. I would def say thats the same house after seeing that. The odds of it being in the same area and having the stump right where the old tree was and it looking so similar has to mean it's the same house!

Kenn, thanks for the thread! I took the afternoon off because my materials didn't show up due to the weather.

I printed them off, scaled them, and actually had a lot of fun looking at the mystery. The posters above pointed out about all that can be gleaned from this.

My opinion...................a definate maybe.:laughing:

Let us know if you find out anything for sure!

I think the only way I could prove it further is to have an uncle of mine go out and take a look, he could probably tell me for sure. But he is an old guy, don't know if that's going to happen. Yeah it has been a mystery, while I was there I walked around the neighborhood several times and that was the only house that looked anything like the picture. So I looked at it for about half an hour trying to decide if that was it.

look in the courtyard at the spacing of the three windows on the right on the new pic and the awnings(windows) of the old pic

In this time period Sears Roebuck sold homes and plans. They were probably built from the same plan.