RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: willowmac on Saturday 27 June 09 14:28 BST (UK)
-
I think the family Photographs were taken at South Shields, I think they are of the same family, one older than the other. Please do not restore.
-
Hi
I think the First Photograph is Dated Around 1890-1899 ..The Second One Dated Around 1905-1910
Hope This Helps In Some Way
Regards
Iria
-
Hi,
Yes I thought they were taken around that time, a 15 year gap.
Thanks for your help.
Cheers Willowmac.
-
Sorry, couldn't resist. Which one is Uncle Fester? ::) ;D
I'm fascinated by the lace collars on the boys in picture two. Is that a little lad in the dress in picture one. I know that is how they dressed small boys back then. I have a wonderful picture in my family collection. Who he was I do not yet know, but what an outfit! Very manly pose too, which makes me smile. What a combination of lace pants and boots. I suppose he had his Sunday socks on too just for the picture.
It is wonderful to have such quality pictures after all this time. Thank you for sharing them with us.
Philip
-
I keep being drawn to the man at the back on the right on the first picture - he looks like he was added later, don't you think?
-
Agree totally Flamingo :)
Trish
-
Agree with the thoughts,1st. around 1893/4 & the 2nd. a decade later at around
1900-08.Definitely an add on in the 1st.Looks like another head has been put on.
The child at the front appears to be a boy.
jim
-
Man at back definately an addition to the original pic... maybe after his death -- Also noting the photos on the matelshelf seems they wanted to include the whole family ... shame we cant see these a little better.
xin
-
Mmmmm..not sure this was taken at home,generally there wouldn't be
enough light,although the set is quite elaborate I think this is a studio
photo.
jim
-
Hi All,
Thanks for all your input. I do know one of the sons was lost at sea, therefore was added to pic and the one in the dress could be a son, they had seven sons. The young ladies in the Photographs I think are the wives and daughters of the older sons.
Cheers Willowmac.
-
I think both photographs were taken in studios. I will get the Photograph out and look on the back to see if there is any info. I think the man and woman seated in the 2 photographs are the same people, my Great Grandfather William Adams and his Wife Amelia Philpot. Do not know if any of the others match. I have some more Photographs of when they were younger. Its a pity where all these Photographs have gone from these studios, all that information lost what a pity.
Willowmac.
-
Hi dont think that the two people seated in both photos are the same in both.If the first photo was taken approx ten years earlier than the second one they seemed to have gotten younger ???
Annette ;)
-
Hi Annette,
Yes I can see what you mean, but the woman looks the same person do you think ?
Everybody looks so similar. The photograph was joined down his face in the first picture, that maybe why.
Willowmac.
-
Hi willowmac
Yes agree that the women look similar in both but I think the woman in the first one has bigger hands.
The man is still puzzling me as I still think he is older in the first photo,eyes are droopier
Annette
-
Hi,
If the woman is also a different person it could be that they are the Parents of William Adams who is in the second picture. They were John Adams and Bethia Ratcliff, do you think the age of the pictures could relate to this, if so the young man next to the one added could be William?. I will have to cross reference their ages to see if that works.
Cheers Willowmac.
-
seated male first pic seems older than seated male 2nd pic
women do look similar??
xin
-
Have to agree that while there are similarities they don't look exactly the same group.
The lady on the right of the 1st. picture has a married pose with her left hand extended
although it's difficult to see if there is a ring there,also she looks pregnant.So is she the
seated woman in the 2nd. picture and the man superimposed the seated man.
jim