RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: deejayEn on Saturday 21 April 18 21:53 BST (UK)
-
We think this is a portrait of my great-grandfather Robert Lay but we're not 100% sure but it would help to date it. Can anyone help identify the year it was taken from the clothing and hairstyle.
The back shows the photographers to be Russell's Studios, 56 High Street, Camden Town, London NW1. Does anyone know anything about them, eg when they were trading and how long they were at that address.
-
This isn't easy as I'm not good at dating men but this will bring it up for Jim...possibly 1915/20 but not sure. Is it a postcard?
Carol
-
I'd say more or less the same as Carol - maybe post WW1-1922 ish.
-
Yes it is a postcard. The back features the photographic studio's name. The man we think it is died in 1918 and was aged 30. I'd say the man in the photo was as bit younger than that so that would be it was taken circa 1908-1914.
Also attached is a photo of the man who we think is his son. Are there any facial recognition experts out there who might be able to say that these two men are related?
-
There are a lot of similarities in the features so the second photo could well be his son. Not as early as 1908 so the later date would be most likely...maybe taken before he went to war.
Carol
-
Thanks for your help. Can anyone narrow it down to a more precise date, I was wondering about the style of neck tie and the way he wears it and the shape of the shirt collar and the number of buttons on the double breasted jacket.
-
Unless Carol has any more info, I think you might have to wait for Jim. The earliest photos that I have with that neck wear (tie and collar) is 1918 and my chart says double breasted jackets came in in 1918. The problem is that most photos of young men at that time were in uniform.
-
Can anyone help date the photo by the clothes/hairstyle, or by the photographers name on the back of the photo. I tried to look up the address (56 Camden High Street) in street directories of the era we think it is from (1910-1918) and found a photogrpahers there in 1914 but not the same name. Can anyone help?
-
I would agree that the 1st. picture is 1920's.
The second is a man of the Rifle Brigade TF also post war.
I can't quite make out the shoulder title but could read London which would make sense.
-
A quick clean of the photos. Thought you might like.
-
Thanks for doing that, it's much appreciated.
-
Hi, I also have a photo of my great grandmother taken at Russell Studios, same address.
I found it interesting as her maiden name was Russell (originally from Ireland) so wondered if there was a family connection. I thought your photo was a beautiful shot. My wife is a photographer so another reason for my interest. Did you find out anything about the studios?
-
Wrong Post.
-
Hi Daniel. Thanks for your info. I did find out a bit more.
The back of the photo is a postcard without a central vertical line printed on it which means it must date from before 1902 after which all postcards had a central vertical line. This means my great grandfather was about 15 and had just left school which makes sernse as to why he was having his portrait taken.
It turns out the adress at 56 Camden Town High Street was that of a photogrtapher called Edward James Lambert, who formed a studio with Thomas King Okey called Lambert and Okey. He had also worked for a famous studios called Elliot and Fry. My guess is that the studio was sold or rented out to a Mr Russell circa 1902.
The person I got the photo from had a second copy of it and that has a different imprint on it showing that Russel's had another studio in south London in Tooting. Annoyingly I haven't bee able to find out any more. Does anyone have any old Tooting street directories?
-
Just to clarify because it doesn't have a line down the back
doesn't mean it's not a divided back postcard.
Pre 1902 postcards looked completely different to this.
It is as dated.
-
I agree with Jim...some show no dividing line but are printed with words "Correspondence"...on the left and "Address Only"...on the right.
Carol
-
Jim1 - I don't know what you mean "it is as dated". It isn't dated, there is no date on it.
When I first made this post I wasn't certain that this was my great grandather, or of the date, now I am. I know that the photo must date from no later than 1903 because we discovered my great-grandad was sentenced to 4 years on the HMS Akbar in 1903 for stealing a watch. He was 19 when he returned and in this photo is clearly younger than that.
All postcards after 1902 had a dividing line on the back to allow for a written message, this doesn't have a line so it must date from no later than that. That would make him about 14 or 15 at most which fits in. What I am trying to do now is find out more about the photographic studio, or stusios as there would appear to be more than one.
-
Sorry I'm afraid your wrong.
Firstly the 2 postcards above have been dated by us.
All postcards after 1902 didn't have a dividing line down the back.
Many did others didn't particularly the later ones.
These are later ones.
Pre 1902 postcards had a space on the front for correspondence.
-
I suggest that you post the back so that we can offer an informed opinion.
Carol
-
Also, no way are the clothes or hairstyle of 1902 vintage. They are circa 1920, as we've said.
-
I'm with Jim and Gadget on this one on all counts.
Carol
-
The second photo of my grandad in uniform is from 1932-33 when he was in the Territorial Army but I only included it originally to compare facially with the other, not to date it. The first photo is of who we are now sure is my great grandfather. It can't be from the 1920s as someone suggesed as he was dead by then We are sure it is from circa 1902-03 and it fits in with him being sent away for 4 years and he looks about 1.
I am uploading the back of the first card to see what you guys think.
Daniel - can you please upload a copy of your Russell's Studio photo so we can see the text or imprint and compare.
-
Jim and Carol are better with PC backs than I am ( and I can't say what the date of this one is) but could I suggest that, even if it's a 1902 back, it could well have been printed on old stock. It wasn't that unusual, particularly if card was short in the post-WW1 period.
It's definitely not 1902 clothing.
-
All postcards after 1902 had a dividing line on the back to allow for a written message, this doesn't have a line so it must date from no later than that.
Here is a divided back postcard without a line :)
Edit - sorry didn't get red warning of previous two postings :-\
-
Thanks I can what you're saying but my card doesn't have any text about correspondence / address on it so I concluded that it was from around the time before the division (with or without the line) was introduced ie 1902. Are you saying that the style of my card was still used later?
NB - it can't date from the 1920s as Robert was dead by then. I grant you the double breasted jacket does look like its from the 1920s but I compared the hair and clothes to other photos and concluded that it could date from circa the early edwardian era, eg see link below - the way the tie is worn and button down shirt are similar, jacket is close in stle and hair very similar.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/november_song/4146042328.
I'm uploading the second copy of the photo which isn't a postcard but has an embossed stamp. it has been colouried and shows off the clothes in more detail.
-
Is it possible it’s the same person? The Man in the first, earlier photo seems to have a scar on his lower lip which I am convinced I can just see in the uniformed man
-
I thought it was the same man as well.
-
The buttons on the jacket in the first photo seem odd to me because they are on the wrong side, they are on the feminine side. For a male's jacket the buttons should be on the right hand side.
-
Thanks for all your help. I think you might be right that it is the same person -my grandad - in both photographs even though he looks very differnet to the way we knew him in the easrlier, vignette portrait.
I found out more about the photographer Russell's - I checked street directories on line and found that there two brothers who were photographers - William Russell and Charles Russell who had studios at 56 Camden High Street and in Tooting, first listed in 1925 and still there in 1930. My grandad lived just round the corner from the Camden address in the late 1920s so it make sense that he would go threre and have his portrait taken when he started work. The suit he is wearing must be his first suit which he bought for his first job at the age of 14 from Caledonian Market. It was secondhand and may well have been old-fashioned (for the time).
My grandad lived with his grandparents in Camden Town after his dad died in 1918. This photo belonged to his uncle who lived with him until 1927 when he emigrated to Australia, the other photo in uniform I got from his other uncle who also lived with him until 1925. This makes sense as to why they both had the photographs which were probably sent to them by their mum, my grandad's gran. Apparently my grandad and his dad did look alike which is why some people in my family were confused when I asked them and thought the vignette image was Robert Victor Lay Senior (they both had the same name).
-
The suit is very much up to date & what I would expect to see a young man wearing in the 1920's.
The buttons aren't on the wrong side what you see are 2 rows of decorative buttons the other probably 3 are as where you would expect to find them.
-
For what it’s worth, I don’t think these two photos are of the same person. Some observations:
I realise that the angles are different, so not easy to compare, but the lad in the first photo has a longer more rounded jaw and the army lad’s jaw looks smaller and chin a bit more pointed. I am not sure about this but think that there may be a shallow dimple in the army lad’s chin. Age wise I don’t think they are very different. The first lad could be around 18, similar for the army lad.
Ear shape appears slightly different - the top lad has a slightly protruding middle ‘edge bit’ whereas the army one’s ear shape is a bit rounder and “fleshier” looking. Lobes look similar though.
The chin line under the lip looks similar in both but that may be down to the lighting. (Sorry I don’t know correct terms for these facial features).
In addition, I think the mouth of the army lad is a different shape and curves up at the corners and his lips look thinner.
I thought 1920s for the first photo before I read any of the replies, due to the hairstyle, which was the first thing I noticed, and it just has a 20s vibe. He’s a good looking lad.
I am on iPad and unable to do a side by side comparison, so some of the above may be a bit off. :)
-
A bit late for you, Ruskie, as you're usually among the first to answer. This thread started in April 2018 ;D ;D ;D
-
The one on Flickr isn't early Edwardian either.
-
I've just had a look, Jim!
I'm not sure who dated it but they're a few years out.
-
I just blew both photos up and studied them and they are both the same person, my grandad. I can see it now. They both have a scar on the lip, as someone pointed out, and they both have the same small lines under the eyes and the same curving of the eyebrows.
Also I have a photo of me at a similar age, I have the same hairstyle and look the same.
I think I just wanted to believe it was my great-grandfather as we don't have any photograhs of him. He died in 1918. I thought the plain back sugested the card was from circa 1902 but I think everything else says 1920s which does fit in with my grandad.
Thanks to everyone who helped.
-
There are more differences than similarities.
Ruskie pointed them out.
Ears different, shape of face different, mouth different.
One has a cleft chin the other doesn't.
-
One last question if Jim or someone caqn help, here is a scan of the back of the second photo, the man in uniform. Does the typography or type arrangement help to date it? Can you tell me anything about the maker of the card.
And does anyone have any further thoughts on the uniform. My grandad was in the Territorials, is this a typical uniform?
-
The K Ltd. stampbox was in use from 1918-36 so not much help.
The uniform was in use up to about the same time.
-
I think my grandad joined the TA in 1931 so that would fit in with those dates.
I can't agree with the observations about the facial features being different. I looked at the tiny lines under the eyes (crows feet?) and I am sure they are the same in both photos. The tops of the eyebrows and the way they cure into the nose are the same. The shape of the eyes are surely the same.
The mouths do look slighlty different but surely that's because one is slightly open the other is closed. I can't really see any difference in the ears bearing in mind they are at different angles.
One problem is that the military photo was scanned flat wherreas the other was taken by a camera and so may have slightly elongated the features esp the chin.
-
The 1st. one was taken in the 1920's & the 2nd. 1930's so he would have been 5-10 years older.
The TA chap looks around 20 as does the other one.
-
A bit late for you, Ruskie, as you're usually among the first to answer. This thread started in April 2018 ;D ;D ;D
;) Yes .... I noticed it was an old thread ... don't know how I missed it at the time. :)
-
I think my grandad joined the TA in 1931 so that would fit in with those dates.
I can't agree with the observations about the facial features being different. I looked at the tiny lines under the eyes (crows feet?) and I am sure they are the same in both photos. The tops of the eyebrows and the way they cure into the nose are the same. The shape of the eyes are surely the same.
The mouths do look slighlty different but surely that's because one is slightly open the other is closed. I can't really see any difference in the ears bearing in mind they are at different angles.
One problem is that the military photo was scanned flat wherreas the other was taken by a camera and so may have slightly elongated the features esp the chin.
The hat is covering the majority of the army lad's eyebrows. :-\
I don't think the eyes are the same in both either .... sorry ... but, they are your relatives so you know them best. :)
-
Looking good :)
-
A couple of thoughts:
1. The colourised photo imprint also seems to state, "& TOOTING". It might be worth researching dates for that branch to see when it opened/closed. No guarantee that will be conclusive but it might help.
2. On the photo of the soldier in uniform. The 'aiguillettes' (i.e. the twisted cords he is wearing) are strongly suggestive of those worn by drummers, possibly meaning he was a 'drummer boy'. If so, that would mean he was no older than 18 in the photo. It might be worth posting that photo in the 'Armed Forces' forum and asking for observations; it is remarkable the information people can produce from uniforms.
Good luck with your research.
Simon
-
Thanks all. I did check out the Tooting branch and found it was run by the photographer's brother from the mid 1920s.
I'm sure this must be my grandad because the Camden studio was literally round the corner from where lived. And his first job was in a piano factory almost behind the photographic studio. Although he does look a bit different to how he looks in other photos.
I have been sent another photo of him when he joined the TA in 1930 age 16 and seems to have a different uniform. I will post both in the milirtary section to find out more.