Hi Tom.....you well could be right....and I am not discounting the other flag and I think that there is the possibility that that flag in the other photo is another flag....unfortunately there is not enough of it and it is shot at another angle but in the same location. It is definitely dark but seems to have some striping or something. I have looked hard at that ribbon in the lighter flag, and it follows the fold, and not to me a shadow, and it is what you would see in other ribbons where the unit name would be placed starting to the right of the folded ribbon. I can't see any shadow in the flag....and you are right it is blowing briskly but there is no definition to mark a shadow...also, look at the pelican....he is white but you can see some dileneation in the feathers (granted, it is closer) so I would think if there were shadows, you would see some. The fringe does have some contrast in it as evidence of some shadow.

I don't have the expertise that you or the regular "posters have" but I really have doubts now that that flag is the blue regimental. You and I know that photographers then and now use props and arrange things (ex. Gettysburg) This flag could well be another flag used by the photographer or as Gregg stated, a wacky personal flag of Custer. And again it was 9 years earlier....who knows what he carried then. But as Gregg stated we will never know. I do personally believe however that the yellow fag was not at the LBH...it was the blue regimental, packed or not. Paxson may have painted it in either using the yellow type common to cavalry when he painted (he even could have looked at this photo!....Notice the eagle in this photo is alot like the eagle in his painting and not a regular regimental eagle...as Gregg said, the wing is a little off!) or this was a flag he saw that was in existence at the time he looked at the things available....coupled with stetments of other parties.

Philip Duer