This is a query about restoration.

[LizzieW]

I have an oval shaped picture of my Aunt Elsie who died in 1920.  It has survived many moves of house by my gran, then my mum and then finally came to me when my mum died.  It was sitting on a shelf in the new study waiting to be hung up when, unfortunately, my OH dropped a pile of books on to it.  It fell to the floor and the frame, which was black and already a bit dodgy broke, as did the glass, piercing the picture.  It is on ¹/₄" thick card and signed by Van Relty(??) Ltd.  It doesn't look like a photograph, more like a pencil drawing perhaps copied from a photograph.

Question:  Is it going to be expensive for someone to repair the slight damage?  I don't just want a digital copy of it - my OH thinks I'm being perverse wanting the original, but it's been part of my life for the whole of my life, always on the wall somewhere or other.

Question:  Is it possible it was done and put in a black frame when she died in 1920, or is it more likely to have been for her 21st birthday in 1917?

Final question:  Has anyone any idea who van Relty(or something) Ltd was.  I found details of the company some time ago - it was in Manchester - but I can't find the details again.  Also would a photographer do a pencil copy of a photograph?

Lizzie

[CaroleW]

Also would a photographer do a pencil copy of a photograph?

I doubt it - you really need an artist to do that type of work

[Treetotal]

Many photographers advertised themselves on the back of cabinet cards as...Artists & Photographers offering portraits in oils or crayon....Could you scan it Lizzie and let us see it...could be a photo drawn over...this sometimes happens when reproduced from an earlier photo where the detail has faded.

Carol

[LizzieW]

Carol - Unfortunately I can't scan it, it is 18" long and 14" wide at its widest, so won't fit on our scanner.  It's sepia coloured.

[Treetotal]

I'm not sure Lizzie but I think a photograph restoration service will only do what we do here but charge you...you could take it in to a photographer for advice and an estimate but I can't see them working on the original...but I could be wrong.
It might be an idea to send Prue a P.M. as she is a photo conservator.
Carol

[LizzieW]

Thanks Carol - I did wonder if a picture restorer might be interested, except I'm sure that would be extremely expensive.  Looking at it again, it could have been stuck onto the card backing, but if so, the original seems more like card than photographic paper.  I've a couple of other photos from about the same time which look what they are, photos, and one of my cousin aged about 18 months old which must have been taken about 1936/7 which is sepia coloured, and sort of matt, but it still looks like a photograph, whereas the one of my aunt looks like a drawing.  I guess a clever photographer could have made a photograph look like a drawing, with clever shading.

I'll see if I can scan part of it and then contact Prue to see what she thinks.

Lizzie

[Treetotal]

Here's one example Lizzie:

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,638980.msg4860015.html#msg4860015

Carol

[LizzieW]

Hi Carol - in my opinion my aunt's photo/drawing is better than that one.  I assume, from what was said on the thread you gave me the link to.  I've scanned the part of the picture that my OH managed to damage, see the sort of cross in the centre, and then I've also scanned the bottom of the picture, so that you can see what I mean about it, perhaps, being a drawing.  Also it shows the signature if anyone can make out what it is.  I know it was of a company in Manchester, as I said I found it a few months ago, but stupidly didn't make a note of it and can't find it again now.

[LizzieW]

Oh gosh, I don't know why they're so large I did try to make them smaller.  I suppose because the photo was so large to start with.  I'll resize them and post again.  Can the others be deleted?