RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: Lisa in California on Thursday 08 February 18 23:15 GMT (UK)
-
I have a copy of a photograph that was possibly taken in a back garden. I do not know the date of the photo but it was taken prior to 1925, possibly in the early 1920s? Two ancestors are seated; they could be ages 50-60. Their five adult children are standing behind them.
After looking at the photograph again, I noticed that the mother has only one shoe showing. The hem of her dress falls to possibly just below her ankle. Not having viewed a lot of photographs before, did subjects commonly cross one foot behind the other, or did most people generally sit with both feet on the ground?
The reason for the question is that this lady's daughter had diabetes and eventually lost her leg. I am wondering if possibly the mother could have had the same problem? Thank you in advance for any guidance.
-
Hi Lisa,
I think that you may have forgotten to attach your image
Sarah :)
-
Hi Sarah: I don't have a good camera (cell phone) to take a photograph so I didn't attach an image. The quality of the photo isn't good, but at least it will give readers an idea of how she is posed. Note: it was only after I zoomed in on her that I noticed how much she is leaning to the side. Thank you for suggesting that I attach the image. :) Lisa
-
I'd say that she had lost her foot/leg. Poor lady.
Have lightened the foot area.
Gadget
-
Hi Gadget:
Thank you for lightening the foot area; that is much better. It does appear that it could be more than her crossing her foot behind the other. Thank you for your help, Gadget.
-
Looking at it again, I see the thighs as symmetrical and then the leg area below the knees is different on each side.. The skirt on that side looks as if it's been arranged as well. She looks quite sad too.
Gadget
-
I have four photographs that include Dora. In three of them, to me, she looks very sad. While my grandfather loved to talk about his father's family, nothing was ever mentioned (that I know of) about Dora's side of the family. Before I started researching, I didn't even know that she had siblings. (My grandfather passed away when I was quite young, so I never heard the stories.) Even though she doesn't appear to show it, I hope she had a good life. :-\ Thank you for your interest and help, Gadget. :)
-
One thing that surprises me with regards to the setting up of the photograph. It is obvious that the dress has been placed in a way to lessen the obvious, ie the missing part of the right leg. So why not put the right hand shoe in a position where the toe and perhaps the instep would show to balance the phtograph. Shoes normaly come in pairs, so one would think that it would/should have been available.
Malky
-
I didn't think of that, Malky. That would make sense. Perhaps "everyone" knew about her leg and they just didn't think about future generations looking at the photo? You did raise a good point; thank you for mentioning it.
-
More than likely, she didn't have a right shoe with her, or she had an arrangement with the shoemaker/seller to only supply one shoe.
Gadget
-
Not knowing where the photo was taken, not having the other shoe is a good possibility as is the idea that she could possibly just order one shoe.
As we discuss Dora, I can't help but wonder about both Dora and her daughter losing a leg/foot. My dad mentioned that Dora's daughter lost her foot/leg (he never mentioned Dora). He mentioned it several times (he used to help me with genealogy questions that I raised). It seems a tiny bit unusual that both women would have the same misfortune, but I suppose that could have been common "back then"?
-
The lady appears to be sitting on the chair at an angle (look at the back of the chair). She is leaning slightly to her right side, and is looking to the left (not straight on).
That may explain why she has put the other foot slightly behind to help with her balance?
It could also explain why the dress is hanging down on her right side.
She is looking a little miserable because you are all trying to chop her foot off!
Giggsy
-
If she was diabetic, it is very likely that she had eye problems as well as foot problems. Was there any mention of Dora's eyes?
Any chance of taking a photo or a scan of the whole photo?
Gadget
-
Hi Giggsy:
I've had some personal problems (don't most of us these days?) and I have to say, your last comment had me laughing out loud. Thank you for the good chuckle.
Dora does appear to be sitting at an angle. However, looking at the chair in relation to everything else, it appears to be at an angle. If that is true, why they wouldn't have fixed it seems odd, but who knows.
I noticed that I had another reply and now see your reply, Gadget. All of my grandparents either passed away prior to my birth or shortly after. We came down to the states when I was young but since my dad worked for an airline, we returned home (Ontario) at least once a year. During our visits Dora was never mentioned. I didn't even know her maiden name prior to beginning my research. I started researching when I was in college (which was a long time ago) ;) and my dad and aunt only mentioned their father's side of the family. They didn't even know that Dora's parents were born in Ireland.
In answer to your question, Gadget, nothing was mentioned about Dora's eyesight. I only knew her first name.
I'm sitting here, trying to duplicate how she was sitting. I can't quite get her pose. Originally, something was holding me back about posting the entire photograph but you all have been very kind with your suggestions and interest. I will attach the entire photo in a few minutes as seeing the entire group could be helpful.
Thank you Giggsy and Gadget for your comments. :)
-
Attaching Dora's photo. Note: The tallest son lost his eye when he was a child, due to an injury (not illness). Also, in another photo that I have of Dora and William when they were younger (taken in a studio) it shows him looking at the camera and her clearly looking away from the photographer. I think it was intention rather than a vision problem.
-
It looks quite formal type pose. I'm thinking that she would have had both feet on the ground as her husband, so still think she was short of part of her leg/foot.
The two daughters' shoes and stance are a puzzle :-\
Sorry, Lisa, I'm getting like an online doctor :-X
-
The daughter standing behind Dora appears to be standing on an earth mound. Thinking that that might have upset the balance of the chair and Dora could have used an unseen foot for balance :-\
Would a death cert mention anything?
-
Hi Lisa
I'm glad I cheered you up a bit! I was wondering how many people would get a chair out and experiment ;D
Giggsy
-
Hi Gadget:
Thank you for the chuckle as well. ;D
I'm not sure what to think at this point. The photo doesn't really show what appears to be an uneven knee area (that I think I can see in my copy).
However, I am on the shorter side and I know that sometimes my feet dangle when I'm sitting down. Is there a chance that she was just trying to balance herself (having dangly feet)? Although, I can sit on a chair similar to the one she was using and my feet don't dangle. :-\
Giggsy - thank you again. Still laughing and giggling.......
I just reread Gadget's comment about the uneven earth. The entire photo is just weird. ???
-
Lisa - maybe it's Ontario photographs - I've got some weird ones of my Ontario rellies in the early 1900s ;D
I've just tried sitting in that slanting position and I nearly fell on the floor with the chair on top
:-X
-
"I've just tried sitting in that slanting position and I nearly fell on the floor with the chair on top".
That's because you didn't have your other foot set back a bit! ::)
Giggsy
-
I can't stop laughing.
2017 wasn't a very good year for me and my family and this year has already had a not-so-good but getting better (hopefully) start so the humour is so appreciated.
I think I will spend time during the weekend to check out the few photographs from my mum's side of the family. Was it just Ontario photos (that were weird)? ;D
Thank you, Giggsy. ;) ;D
-
After reading all of the posts and laughing at the humour, I took a good look at the photo and started giggling to myself, I have to share my thoughts ;D :-X
Not only does Dora potentially have a missing foot, but the two daughters are obviously hiding the fact that neither of them have hands, the daughter behind Dora has only one leg with two feet attached sticking out sideways, and the husband has no fingers on his right hand.
The only one that we know had a disability was the poor son who lost his eye.
Was their neighbour a practicing amputation surgeon :o
-
In the photo where Gadget has lightened the area, you can see a small lighter patch to the left of the shoe. I have tried to enhance the area, could it be her other shoe? Or am I seeing things that are not there :-\ :-\
Pat
-
I would say that what you'rre seeing is a pebble or lighter piece of soil, Pat. If you look at that area on the full pic, there's a small mound of earth. You've smoothed it which disguises the soil.
I can't see a foot there but she could be hiding it.
-
Here's a larger portion of the full photo showing the soil
PS - the full picture makes it more likely that she's got her foot hidden on the uneven ground.
-
Judging by the expression on the faces of the two chaps on the left, I think they have spotted the missing leg... by the side of the photographer :)
-
The chair looks oddly positioned as if on uneven ground and it would appear that she has put her left leg further forward to steady herself and the daughter is helping to steady the chair...to balance the photo, the other daughter has adopted a similar stance.
Given what I have read about early photography, I believe that a good photographer would have made attempts to disguise the fact that she was missing her right foot.
The humour really made me smile ;D
Carol
-
Is that her foot under the other chair ??? ??? ??? ;D
Malky
-
Is that her foot under the other chair ??? ??? ??? ;D
Malky
Wow Malky, I do believe you have found it! ;D ;D ;D
-
Thank you all for your interest, your great detective work and the laughter that it has brought. After reading all of your comments, it appears that she may not have lost a foot after all. It appears that she had four feet (as well as her own two feet she also had a couple under the other chair and near the photographer).
I phoned my mum last night. She is quite elderly and while she has a terrific memory, she cannot recall anyone on my father's side having lost a foot. I know someone did as my father mentioned it and my mum used to be concerned about diabetes being passed down to my brother and me.
I am leaving momentarily, but as soon as I return I will try shining a light on the photo to see if I can see any clues. I wish I had the original photograph; I don't even know where it is.
Thank you all again. You've all brightened my day. Lisa
-
Giggsy wins the prize for the best guess about Dora's missing foot and why Dora appears sad. Good news - I found Dora's ankle, foot and shoe in a later photograph.
Several years ago, my aunt sent me copies of old family photographs. I ran across them tonight when I was looking for an unrelated photograph. I knew I had photographs of Dora's adult children; I didn't realize some of the photographs included Dora as well!
While Dora did a good job of hiding her feet in several of the photographs (standing in a field of tallish grass, photo taken of the group from the ankles up, etc.) I did find a photograph that clearly shows that she had two ankles and two feet and hence, two shoes. I'm attaching a poor quality picture (it is too dark in the house to properly light the photo).
Note: I am assuming (for various reasons) the photo below was taken after the photo I first posted. Thank you all again for your time, contributions and humour. I really appreciate everyone's input.
PS I am thrilled I noticed Dora in the photos as in a couple of the photos she is smiling -- she looks like she was a sweet lady.
Lisa
-
Hate to spoil a good story, Lisa, but when you zoom in you can clearly see that the mark about knee height is not damage to the photo but a tear in her skirt made by a rough edge on the bolt used to attach her artificial leg.
Peter
-
She's wearing a mini-skirt :o
(What a relief) ;D
-
Thank you Peter for your insight. We were able to shine a light on the photograph, used my son's i-pad(?) and took another picture. The individuals in my "original" photo do not have what appears to be clown noses, those marks turned up in this picture. :o I included the rest of the individuals to show that it was a breezy day. I am guessing that the photograph may have been taken c1924.
Looking at the latest image, does it still appear that Dora had an artificial leg? I don't mind if she did or didn't, it would just be nice to figure this out.
Again, thank you Peter for your thoughts. Lisa
-
My vote is for having both her own legs and feet.
I have thought so from the beginning . . . Just for the record! ;D :D ;D. (I often sit with one foot tucked in behind the other.)
I am prepared to be wrong, but just saying!!
Got lovely clean shoes too! ;)
Peter, had the man on her left also got a tear in his trousers? ;D
-
Sorry, Lisa, I was just... pulling your leg. ;D
Peter
-
Wiggy - ;D
Peter - I dunno - it sounds plausible to me. But, I am known to be so gullible. ::) ;D
-
PS The reason I also went back to thinking about her situation, is that the few photos that I just "found" again don't show her feet except the one above, and she is either leaning on a relative or she is listing slightly (listing to the right). But perhaps its that uneven ground again; she certainly seemed to find the best spots for her photos. ;)
-
That right foot looks bigger than the left one and the right ankle looks smaller .
She still looks sad :-\
-
Her foot is probably swollen like mine is at the moment! ;) ;)