RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: JDGen on Wednesday 03 May 06 16:48 BST (UK)
-
Looking for some advice on dating the attached photo please. It turned up at a recent family reunion and the writing at the side says Uncle G Barratt's grandmother. Now Uncle G Barratt was born in 1822 when mother and father were both already 42!! So unlikely to be grandmother but possibly his mother? So my question is, could this photograph have been taken before 1861? (and therefore be my 3xggrandmother!!)
Any advice gratefully received!
Jean
-
It could be a daguerrotype or callotype which were around before then. It does have that 'painterly' feel to it. What does the original look like and what size is it?
Gadget
-
Hi Gadget,
It looks to be paper stuck onto a piece of blank card - the picture has a matte finish. Size is about 6cm by 9cm. There are other photos in the same album which date before 1868 so I live in hope!!
Jean
-
Does it look as if it could be drawn/watercoloured rather than an overall 'photo' effect? These early photos were like that and her clothes certainly look of that age.
There is Prue's site:
http://victorian-photos.rootschat.net
which could give you some pointers.
Gadget
-
Hi Gadget,
Yes drawn rather than watercoloured and not very clear as per the posted image (though not bad for a possible 150 years!).
I was hoping that the clothes might help to date this one but didn't have much luck with google - I certainly don't think it can be GB's gran so here's hoping!
Jean
-
Well I would say that the clothes are very much of that age. Prue will have more advice when Oz get's up ;)
Gadget
-
Sorry both, I missed this thread!
OK, not a daguerreotype as it's not on metal. It's an albumen print, but that doesn't help much, except to say it's no earlier than probably 1860. Overpainted portraits (which this is) were very common all through the 19th and early 20th centuries, first in just black, white and grey (when photos didn't have a lot of contrast, like this one) and later in colour (like WW1 photos of soldiers).
The size of the photo indicates carte-de-visite size, which was also very common from the 1860s-1880s...I think we will have to rely on the clothing and the style of portrait to help us, and I can't see either now that I'm replying!! I will have a better look tonight and see what clues I can get.
Prue
-
It could be a callotype though Prue.
Gadget
-
Yes, it could be, but I don't think it is. It would be extremely unlikely to have survived. They were mostly done only by experimental pioneers of photography, not by commercial photographers. I'm pretty sure I can see a gouge out of this photo (up in the lady's bonnet I think) which indicates to me that there is a layer over the paper (ie. baryta and emulsion).
The style of this portrait suggests a much later date, like 1880s, but I think the clothes look 1860s. It's hard to tell the age of the lady with so much overpainting (a bit like that godsend, makeup!! ;D ) but I would think she is probably middle-aged (whatever that is! I'm thinking 50s-60s perhaps).
I would lean towards it being Uncle G's mother rather than grandmother - if his grandmother, and I'm right with the date (say mid-late 1860s) then she would have to be in her 80s in this photo and it doesn't seem that way.
Prue
-
I had to scan and the repair the image of a callotype a few years ago, so some survived. It did have a pencil drawing like finish which Jean says this one has, when I asked her about it. The costume is definitely 1860s though.
Gadget
-
I agree that it's later than the period when you could expect a calotype.
The pencilly drawing appearance of this print is due to the overpainting, not the inherent qualities of the original print. This is definitely an albumen print with overpainting. Even the pale yellowy colour suggests this. I would not expect a calotype to look like this (incidentally the calotype is the negative; the positive it produces is a salted-paper print) - the colour is one thing that is wrong. There were a very few calotype-producers who did commercial portraiture but these were few and far between and you would be hard pressed to find anyone doing them after about 1850. Daguerreotypes were far more successful because their quality was much better. After the invention of the glass plate negative, albumen prints took off and photography never looked back - and that was around 1860.
Cheers
Prue
-
I agree that it's later than the period when you could expect a calotype.
Daguerreotypes were far more successful because their quality was much better.
Cheers
Prue
OOOOhhh Prue :o Fox Talbot would not like that statement ;)
Wasn't there colloidian after wards???
I'd really like a detailed close up because, although Jean said it wasn't watercolour, it certainly looks tinted watercolour to me. The one I handled was far more cold grey and drawn.
When did CDV's take off - 1850s ???
Gadget
-
Nah Talbot wouldn't have minded...anyway he and Herschel invented silver-based fixed photography, it just took a while to take off (like 50 years!!) so he got his 15 minutes in the end ;D
Collodion as an emulsion was only used on glass negs, and that was from 1851 onwards. It wasn't used as an emulsion for positives until about 1880 (when the dry process was refined).
The style of this photo with the head and shoulders, and the soft vignetting, along with the albumen colloid, blank card and clothes, suggest late 1860s-early 1870s to me...and that's my final word on the matter ;D
I would really like to see a close-up scan of the surface, though. I agree it's overpainted and would like to see details of that.
Prue
-
Hello.
Are they not fascinating these old photo's!.
According to this website a CDV was first produced in england in 1859
so perhaps that gives some indication of the date.
http://www.cartes.freeuk.com/time/date.htm
The lady certainly looks to be in her mid to late 50's, maybe even
into her early 60's.
Mike.
-
Hi All and thanks for the interest.
I've tried to do a more detailed scan, attached is best effort (advice needed if this isn't good enough!). I only have the album for a couple more days at best.
It looks to be thin paper pasted onto card, I can't see anything on the back, it seems to be blank white. The finish is very matte.
Hope this helps, maybe I'll be able to claim her eventually!!
Jean
-
Thanks Jean, that's great.
I think it confirms my guesstimates - albumen print, carte-de-visite, post-1860 and probably late 1860s-early 70s.
Being overpainted, it's difficult to be more specific judging by the clothes because we can't see them properly, but I think she is probably the age that saddler suggests, 50s or 60s. In that case the clothes could be considered old-fashioned and the photo style is the better indicator of date than the clothes.
Prue
-
Hope you don’t mind me having a play with your photo.
Barbara
-
Not at all Barbara, Thank you very much, it's great!
Jean