RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: mientajb on Thursday 20 August 15 20:20 BST (UK)
-
I have a photograph of my second great grandmother that must have been taken about 1850. It is unusual in that it is more like a negative and is on glass. It is mounted in a frame. I have not come across anything like this before or since. Does anyone know what kind of photograph this is and is it possible to use it to make a print. Thank you in advance. Alan
-
http://www.cartedevisite.co.uk/dating/types-of-photograph/
-
Very interesting. Thank you.
Alan
-
It would appear that it is an Ambrotype photograph. Is there any way that I can get a more recognisable print from it.
Alan
-
Hi Alan...If you scan it at 300dpi and in colour mode and post it here it can be turned into a more positive image for you.
Carol
-
Ok. I shall have a go. Thank you.
Alan
-
I have had a go at scanning the picture. The best one seems to be when I used a black background. I should be most interested to see what you can do.
Very many thanks.
Alan
-
This one was done using a different scanner.
Alan
-
Most interesting, will look forward to what the experts make of it.
-
Hi Alan, It looks very much like an Ambrotype to me. I have one too, and at first glance I thought it was the same lady in my photo, but comparing the two it's not.
Here's a link to the thread about my ambrotype, with some expert advice. :)
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=437314.0
-
Both ways:
-
Isn't she lovely. Thank you.
Her name is Elizabeth Landon and she was born in Westbury on Severn in 1835.
Alan
-
Joel,
Very interesting thread. The frame on your picture is identical to mine.
I am so pleased to have a paper copy now as I am always terrified to handle the original.
Alan
-
You may be interested to know that ambrotypes are in reverse. In this you can see her right hand on display which was the usual pose for a married woman showing her wedding ring. As it's a reverse image it's actually her left hand.
Late 1850's I would say but possibly into the early 1860's.
Probably just after marriage.
This is how she would have posed.
-
That is very interesting. Thank you.
Alan
-
If you know someone with Darkroom skills they should be able to print it for you.
-
It certainly does look as though she is showing off her left hand. She married in 1865 which would probably have been too late for this image. She looks younger as well. I wonder if she was married before?
Alan
-
It certainly does look as though she is showing off her left hand. She married in 1865 which would probably have been too late for this image. She looks younger as well. I wonder if she was married before?
Alan
Engagement rungs were not as common as today but a possibility.
-
Can you send again without "reversed" on it. Thanks,
-
She is shown as being a Spinster at her wedding in 1865. She was 30 but her husband was only 20. Were they still taking this type of photograph in 1865, were they behind the times in deepest Gloucestershire. Interesting how the dead talk to us, possibly in riddles but they are still trying to tell their story.
Alan
-
What would it look like if someone printed it in a darkroom?
Alan
-
If you modify the Subject line Alan to request a restore then the restorers will work on it for you. I'm busy today but will have a go for you tomorrow.
Carol
-
Carol,
Thank you. Alan
-
Wonderful to see what can be done.
Alan
-
I've managed to lighten it a bit, hope this is better for you, I've reversed it too.
Pat
-
That is magnificent. Thank you.
I think that I can see a wedding ring so it is 1865.
Alan
-
Could this be as late as 1865 you ask.
Her dress style wouldn't be particularly out of place in 1865 although fashion had moved on a little from this outfit.
Her hairstyle again is a bit old fashioned as most younger women were now wearing their hair differently.
Ambrotypes were superseded by albumin prints in 1858, commonly called CdeV's but there was an overlap in medium & you can still see ambrotypes from the early 1860's.
I can't recall seeing one as late as 1865.
My view is that it's earlier than that.
-
Hi Alan...A clean from me as promised...I agree with Jim and don't see a ring I think it's a mark on the photo.
Carol
-
A lighter version for you with a warmer tone.
Carol
-
Her father was a labourer. Working people did not wear such clothes and did not have such photographs taken of them yet, give it another 20 years. Perhaps she made a good marriage. May we know the name of the man she married?
-
Carol,
Thank you so much. The two pictures are wonderful. You can see much more of her face.
Her father was Thomas Landon but he died in 1835, the same year that Elizabeth was born. He was indeed a labourer. Her mother remarried Thomas James in 1840. Thomas was a fisherman by trade. He had a large family from a previous marriage so I doubt that there was much money in the family.
Elizabeth married Enoch Barnett in 1865, Enoch was 10 years younger than her and was a carpenter by trade. They lived in Staunton, Coleford, Gloucester.
We will probably never know when and why this photograph was taken. She does look younger than thirty and all of the evidence would suggest that it was taken in the 1850's. At first we did wonder if she had married before but we can find no record of this and she did say that she was a spinster in her wedding to Enoch.
Carol, thank you again for bringing this old picture back to life.
Alan
-
Hi Alan...You are very welcome...what a lovely thing to have...I wonder if it could be a 21st Birthday?
Thanks for the background information...I often wonder about the life and personality of the sitter when I restore a photo.
Carol
-
Two late goes.
Terry
-
They are lovely. Thank you.
Alan