Suey, just spent a creepy few minutes looking through the list that Google brought up, it seems it was quite popular in America & many people collect them now. Each unto his own
We have to remember that, at least in earlier times, it may have been the only chance a family had to photograph a loved one. Also for many immigrant families in America, perhaps the photographs were for family "back home" - could explain why there are so many from the early-mid 20th century.
Logged
Paper and Photograph Conservator I live in NSW, and am researching: BALFOUR (Derry) – BIGG (Kent) – BONSALL (DBY, NTT, CHS) – BRISBANE (Fife) – DANKS (STS) – DOBSON (BRK) – FRANCIS (ESS) – GOODE (HAM) – HAYNES (Cork) – INGRAM (MDX, SOM) – LANGWORTHY (Jersey, DEV) – MCKAY (Fife, Aberdeen, Banff, Moray, Inverness) – MORRISH (LND) – NANCARROW (CON) – OGILVIE (Moray, LND) – STRATHDEE (Banff) – SWAN (Fife) – WOOD (LND)
Hello there..I've been reading your thread and I hope you don't mind if I stick my two cents worth in.. There is a website that you may want to take a peek at..it's modern day and tastefully done..
Prue, I was pondering the question as to why people should want such a photograph & like you, realised, especially in the case of an infant, that they probably didn't have a live likeness, those being the days before digital camera's, cell phone camera's etc. Any photograph had to be pre-planned & a trip to the photographers arranged. These days, the camera's are rolling in the delivery room I know some of us find it morbid but I'm sure these pictures were taken for genuine reasons of rememberence & they do represent part of our history worth preserving. Just I'm not going to be the one collecting & preserving