Old photo dating - man's hat may be a clue?

[Arvanitakis]

Hi,

Could anyone help dating this old photo either from Birkenhead or Chester?

No photographers name to be found sadly,

A

[DrDude45]

Here's a cleaned up photo to help a bit.

[jim1]

1860's. I assume this is an ambrotype ie. on glass.

[Arvanitakis]

Thank you DrDude for clearing the photo up!!

Jim1,

How can one tell if it is an ambrotype? The back is just black lacquer apparently (I don't have the original - a family member sent it to me).

From what I know of my family it is probably either from around 1862+ and taken in Chester, or 1886+ and taken in Birkenhead.

I find it difficult to date the fashion. Would anyone know about this hat and what era it dates from? Also would the baby be a boy or girl or is it hard to tell?

Thanks,
A

[jim1]

There were 2 similar processes, ambrotypes (on glass) & tintypes (on metal). You can tell the difference by putting a magnet against it. However as this is lacquered would make it an ambrotype.
Introduced in 1851 & superseded by the CdeV in the late 1850's. The 2 ran along side each other until about the mid 1860's. 1862 looks right. It certainly isn't 1880's.
There's no way of telling from this if the baby is male or female.

[Regorian]

His clothes say 1860's too. The bowler hat was invented in 1848. facial hair was looked down on by the working classes as being dirty until the Crimean War 1854/56. At least officers grew beards in winter time to help keep warm. After the war, beards became very widespread, both in Europe and U.S.A. Glad I wasn't a woman then. 

[Arvanitakis]

Thank you all for your replies.

I have just looked into the dates and I'm not sure this is the generation I thought it was. If it were my 3rd great grandfather who married and had his first child in 1862 he would be only 21 and his wife 23 - these people look much older and from what has been said about ambrotypes - could it be the same people if dated a lot later?

Another option would be a generation earlier for my 4th great grandfather whose youngest son was born in 1857 - the father would have been 49 and the mother mid 30s which looks more likely?

Wonder what others think?

A

[giggsycat]

He doesn't appear to have a grey hair in sight so I don't think he is that old?

Giggsy

[Arvanitakis]

Could the photographic process darken hair?