A.

Help me focus on what being presented.

A.

It's easier to keep your attention to a changing picture than to keep it at two pictures at the same time. Also A shows you that the second picture is the backside of the first picture.

"A" by a country mile.

I agree: it has to be A.

Richard

Somewhat unanimous John. Of interest what did you use to do it? A transition?

Thank you for all your responses. I haven’t checked to see if more prints are available.

I put the front and back images on two stacked tracks and rotated around the y axis using 3D Track Motion.

I do really like the animation, but I'd propose a third option: have just the front of the photo at first, then add the back image.  So you start with A, but end up with B, if that makes sense.  

Maybe keep a copy of the front and slide to the left, while doing the rotation thing sliding to the right. The original image is presented without distraction, then additional content is added and people will naturally be drawn to that.  But then they have the opportunity to return their view to the original image, to apply the information learned from the back.

I base this on what I'd do if I was looking at a real photo.  After you've read the back, you almost always turn around to the front again.  I think once I read the back, I want to be able to see the original photo again.

Or, do animation A, but after showing the back, return to the front again before moving on. The rotation is very well done. (Just my two cents, though my data point seems to be an outlier...)

"A"
 

I prefer B. During the animation I'm waiting to see the photo. I don't like anything but crossfades and slow zooms with stills, especially older ones where there seems to be a strange mix of old and new..

I would do the front, a slow zoom to the faces area, pause, quick crossfade to the back, stay there a bit and quick dissolve.

In either case the quality of the presentation is fantastic. Nice work.

Hmmm... I really like the detail of the Photographer’s establishment. I’d be thinking further and somehow Composite slices of the details of that Art Nouveau look and feel. I can really see an opportunity to use the “history” to set the scene and add to the narrative.

Yeah, I can see lots that can be done that would add value.

Tim L said:

"I base this on what I'd do if I was looking at a real photo.  After you've read the back, you almost always turn around to the front again.  I think once I read the back, I want to be able to see the original photo again."

Here's a version inspired by Tim's comments: This time I'm showing both of the subject's wives.

Hulk said:

"I would do the front, a slow zoom to the faces area, pause, quick crossfade to the back, stay there a bit and quick dissolve."

I'm mulling...

Grazie said:

" I’d be thinking further and somehow Composite slices of the details of that Art Nouveau look and feel. I can really see an opportunity to use the “history” to set the scene and add to the narrative."

Good idea. There is a lot of black space in each frame. I'm reminded of the end credits of The Greatest Showman. I don't have an example, but I saw it this weekend.

I don't know how many of these pictures you are dealing with, but it could feel space if you spanned them out like a deck of cards and reveal each pic front and back, similar to a card trick (you know, pick a card, any card)

I have 23 (46 images front and back) and I’ve prepared half of them in Photoshop from the original scans. I have many, many others but these all seemed to have interesting backs with comments.