History is messy. It’s dirty, it’s blurred, and in the case of Henry McCarty—better known as Billy the Kid—it’s mostly lost to the desert winds of New Mexico. You’ve probably seen the image. The one where he’s standing stiff, wearing a crumpled hat and a look that suggests he’d rather be anywhere else. That’s the "Upham tintype." For over a century, it was the only image the world had of the most famous outlaw in American history. Just one.
Think about that.
The Kid lived through the golden age of early photography, a time when every dusty trail town had a studio and every drifter wanted a portrait to send home. Yet, we have almost nothing. Because of this scarcity, Billy the Kid photos have become the Holy Grail for collectors, historians, and every person who finds a box of old tin pictures in their grandma’s attic. People want to find him. They want to be the one who discovers the "lost" Billy. But honestly? Most of what you see on social media or sensationalized news reports is just wishful thinking.
The Tintype That Defined a Legend
The famous Upham tintype was taken outside Beaver Smith’s saloon in Old Fort Sumner around 1879 or 1880. It’s a reverse image, which led to decades of people thinking Billy was a "left-handed gun." He wasn't. The Winchester carbine and the Colt revolver were on the wrong sides because of how the chemicals reacted on the metal plate. It’s a tiny thing, roughly two by three inches. It’s scratched. It’s dark. But in 2011, billionaire William Koch bought it at auction for $2.3 million.
That price tag changed everything.
Suddenly, every blurry photo of a skinny kid in a vest became a potential multi-million dollar lottery ticket. If you find a real photo of the Kid, you aren’t just finding history; you’re finding a retirement fund. This has created a massive industry of "experts" and hopeful amateurs trying to prove that their find is the real deal.
The Croquet Photo: A Lesson in Skepticism
Remember the 2015 frenzy? A guy named Randy Guijarro bought a photo for two dollars at an antique shop in Fresno, California. It showed a group of people playing croquet. He claimed one of those people was Billy the Kid. National Geographic even made a documentary about it. They used facial recognition software and "geographic matching" to try and prove the location was the Tunstall ranch.
🔗 Read more: Curtain Bangs on Fine Hair: Why Yours Probably Look Flat and How to Fix It
But here’s the thing. Most serious historians don’t buy it.
The clothes are wrong for the region. The people in the photo haven't been definitively linked to the Regulators through any other primary source. Robert Stahl, a retired professor and Billy the Kid expert, has been a vocal critic of these "new" finds. He argues that without a "chain of custody"—a clear line of ownership from the 1880s to today—a photo is basically just a picture of a guy who looks like a guy. You can't just look at a chin or a nose and say, "Yep, that’s the Kid."
Historical verification is brutal. It requires more than a resemblance. It requires provenance.
Why Provenance Matters More Than Pixels
If you found a photo today, how would you prove it's him? You'd need:
- A documented history of who owned the photo since 1881.
- Forensic analysis of the plate or paper to ensure the materials match the era.
- Identification of every other person in the frame.
If Billy is in a photo, he’s likely with the Regulators. Charlie Bowdre, Tom O'Folliard, or maybe Pat Garrett before they became enemies. If you can’t identify the friends, you probably haven’t found the outlaw.
The Dedrick Photo and the "Second" Billy
There is one other photo that has gained significant traction, often called the "Dedrick photo." It shows a man who looks remarkably like the Kid, and it supposedly came from the family of Dan Dedrick, one of Billy's close pals. It’s more convincing than the croquet image because the connection to the Dedrick family provides that elusive chain of custody.
💡 You might also like: Bates Nut Farm Woods Valley Road Valley Center CA: Why Everyone Still Goes After 100 Years
Even so, the debate rages.
Some say the ears are wrong. Others point to the slope of the shoulders. It’s a rabbit hole. People spend years—decades, even—analyzing the bridge of a nose in a 150-year-old image. It’s a bit obsessive, but that’s the power of the legend. Billy the Kid represents the ultimate symbol of the untamable West. We want to see his face because we want to see if we can spot the "killer" or the "hero" in his eyes.
The Reality of 19th-Century Photography
Back then, getting your picture taken was an event. You had to sit still for several seconds. If you blinked, you were a ghost. If you moved your hand, it became a blur. This is why everyone in Billy the Kid photos (or any Victorian-era photo) looks so stiff and miserable. They weren't necessarily sad; they were just trying not to ruin the exposure.
Billy was a fugitive for a good chunk of his famous years. Does a man with a bounty on his head walk into a photography studio? Maybe. He was notoriously cocky. But he was also smart. Most of the "newly discovered" photos show a man lounging around, posing for a group shot. That doesn't really fit the profile of a man being hunted by a posse.
The Upham tintype survived because it was given to Dan Dedrick, who kept it safe. It wasn't left in a shoebox; it was a prized possession. That’s how these things usually work. Real history rarely hides in a pile of junk at a flea market, though we all love the story of the "two-dollar find."
Spotting the Fakes
If you’re looking at an image and wondering if it’s a real Billy the Kid photo, look for these red flags:
📖 Related: Why T. Pepin’s Hospitality Centre Still Dominates the Tampa Event Scene
- The clothing is too modern (look at the collar styles).
- The "weathering" looks artificial or applied with chemicals.
- The person is holding a weapon that wasn't manufactured until after 1881.
- The photo is a "cabinet card" (paper) rather than a tintype (metal), though both existed, tintypes were more common for quick, cheap portraits in the territories.
What Billy Really Looked Like
Contemporary accounts describe him as having blue eyes, being about five-foot-eight, and having a "slight" build. He had prominent front teeth—some called them "squirrel teeth." He was also known to be quite charismatic and a frequent dancer at local fandangos.
When you look at the Upham tintype, you see a bit of that. He looks scruffy, sure, but there’s a smirk there. Most "found" photos miss that essence. They show a generic 19th-century laborer and try to force the Kid’s legend onto him.
The search for more Billy the Kid photos will never stop. It shouldn't. There is always a chance that another plate exists in some forgotten trunk in Silver City or Lincoln. But until it comes with an airtight history, it's just a ghost.
What You Should Do If You Think You Found One
Don't go to the news first. That's a mistake. The media loves a "lost treasure" story, but they don't do the legwork.
- Contact a reputable auction house like Brian Lebel’s Old West Events or Cowan’s Auctions. These people deal with authentic Western Americana daily.
- Hire a forensic genealogist. You need to know exactly who owned that photo in 1900, 1920, and 1950.
- Brace yourself for disappointment. Statistically, it's probably not him.
The Kid remains elusive. Maybe that’s for the best. Part of the allure of Billy the Kid is that he’s a shadow. We have his names, we have his deeds, and we have that one, singular, gritty image of him standing in the sun. Everything else is just us trying to catch a glimpse of a man who didn't want to be caught.
If you want to dive deeper into the verified history, stick to the archives. The Lincoln County War records and the correspondence of Governor Lew Wallace offer more "pictures" of the Kid's character than any blurry tintype ever will. Check out the work of historians like Frederick Nolan or Robert Utley. They've done the heavy lifting so you don't have to guess.