RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: gordonbb on Friday 25 February 11 03:51 GMT (UK)
-
Hello to Prue, China & Co.
I promise I haven't posted this one before ;D
Attached is a photo I recently obtained of a painting in the collection of a distant cousin of mine that is of Peter Laing Gordon who is the source of much mystery in my research.
(http://wildscotsman.smugmug.com/History/Family-Hist/PeterLaingGordon32/1154168532_H7vWz-X3.jpg)
Peter Laing Gordon
born Peter Laing, baptized 11 Feb 1799 at St. Nicholas Parish, Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire Scotland
died 31 Mar 1866, Torphins, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
His parents were:
Peter (Patrick) Laing b abt 1774
m 16 Jan 1796, Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Margaret Walker b 16 Feb 1772, d 24 Nov 1842, Old Marchar, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Looking at it I wonder if it is a painting over top of a photograph (see inner thigh detail). Conversely the perspective of the left arm seems off but the fact he is holding a cane and waering a glove on that hand may indicate a deformity.
The original image did not have very high resolution and was shot at an oblique angle to avoid reflection from the glass protecting it and I have just done a perspective crop in PS and some light use of the spot healing brush and clone stamp to fix crazing.
Unfortunately the original is located on the west coast of Canada and I am in Central Canada so it may be some time before I can attempt to photograph it using a copy stand.
This will also require some patient cloning to get rid of the specks but I an not requesting any cleanups - thank-you.
Regards,
Bruce
-
my try
sylvia
-
Hi Gordon...Have you seen this...is it just a coincidence...or could there be a conection...
http://www.thegordondnaproject.com/162679.html
What a superb image to have in your collection..what a shame you don't want any restortations :-\ ;D ;D ;D
China has come out to play now so this will bring it up the board for her attention ;D
Carol
-
Unfortunately men dressed this way over a long period so realistically it could be anywhere from 1840's - 60's.
If this was an overpainting it would have to be on copper (daguerreotype 1840-51) or glass (ambrotype 1851-58).
It could of course be a painting copied from a photo.You would need to ask the owner what medium was used.
jim
-
I don't think it's a painting I think it's oil pastel.
Carol
-
Hi Gordon...Have you seen this...is it just a coincidence...or could there be a conection...
http://www.thegordondnaproject.com/162679.html
What a superb image to have in your collection..what a shame you don't want any restortations :-\ ;D ;D ;D
Carol, That is no coincidence but my DNA results - we are trying to determine how Peter Laing Gordon inherited an estate from someone he apparently (according to agents of the Duke of Huntly) was not related to.
And, anyone who wants to take a crack at a restoration is welcome - I just plan on doing it myself when I have time (I'm in the middle of splitting my database of 3000 souls in TMG so my free time is naught) - The restorations just aren't required.
-
Hi Bruce :)
Fantastic image!
I'm guessing, as you have, that it's an overpainted photograph. Very heavily (and quite well) painted, too. The sitter looks youngish so I'd guess at a date in the 1840s or early 50s...that would make the original a daguerreotype or ambrotype, as Jim says. Of course the youth could be enhanced - we can't see what he really looks like under all that paint - so in reality it might have been a photo on paper from the 1860s, and he's a fair bit older than he looks ;)
Can you give us an idea of the size of the pic?
Would love to see the "good" photo when you are able to take it, and a few more details of framing etc. just for interest's sake...if you care to post :D
Cheers
Prue
-
Hi Gordon....You say in your first post that it is a photo of a painting...Do you have any idea who the artist was because it looks very much like it is an Oil Pastel to me...It's unusual for a painting to be under glass.
The left hand side of his body is out of proportion too...not just the hand....His shoulder would be elevated when his arm is raised is this position...Just my opinion.
Carol
-
...Can you give us an idea of the size of the pic?
Would love to see the "good" photo when you are able to take it, and a few more details of framing etc. just for interest's sake...if you care to post :D...
Here[/u] (http://wildscotsman.smugmug.com/photos/1201085320_rqRK9-X3.jpg) is a link to a down scaled version of the image I received (still to big to post though). You can see the frame but there is nothing to give it scale.
I'd say a Daguerreotype would be the right size though.
I'll ask my cousin for more details.
It's frustrating having a copy stand and a good camera but not being able to use it.
I've been chasing this gentlemen for so long that it is just great having an image of him.
Regards,
Bruce
-
That's lovely, Bruce - how lucky you are :)
I guess without undoing the frame we're never going to know what the paint or pastel is covering. I think we can be confident that it is some kind of photo though. I'd be surprised if it is a Daguerreotype simply because the surface of those is so delicate that it would be difficult to (a) paint over it without the image disappearing, and (b) see enough of the detail while painting to render it accurately.
-
For me this image fails on so many levels as being an overpainted photo...There are so many irregularities in the proportions of his body...the knee nearest the camera should be bigger and more exaggerated...the ear is too small and set too far back in his head and his upper left side is out of proportion...there doesn't appear to be a light source with corresponding shadows..When I opened it in Elements...the support looks grainy like Ingress paper which is the preferred support of artists for using Oil or Chalk Pastels.
Could this be the answer:
http://inventors.about.com/od/weirdmuseums/ig/Illustrated-History-Photograph/Joseph-Nicephore-Niepce-s-heli.htm
Carol
-
Hi Carol :)
Definitely not a Niepce, but I see where you're coming from re. the texture...I am sure that the shiny/grainy bits we can see in the photo of the picture are where some medium has been added to indicate depth/dimension. Something like gum arabic or ox gall...a watercolour medium. I've seen it before on miniature watercolours on paper.
I know some of the proportions of the body and face are wrong but I'm convinced it is an overpainted photo. I can only guess that in the process of painting in the ground/body colour, some sense of the correct outlines was lost and the painter then did their best to make it up. It could have been something like the old way of portrait painting, when the master did the face and an assistant (not quite so good!) did the remainder...big guesses here, though!
-
Hi Prue...I can't speak from a photographic point of view but from an artist's point of view...gum arabic added to water colour would serve to thin the paint and the finish here is thick and heavy and quite oily...so I'm not convinced that this is a water colour.
I have had closer look at this.....and there are elements to image that give me reason to believe that it could be an overpainting for reasons that you have already pointed out...the dog toothed check on the trousers would be difficult to replicate in such fine detail...the features are excellent and if this was a piece of my art work I would be very pleased to be able to achieve this level of accuracy...There are also dark areas that have been missed in the colouring process that indicate and underlying image that I had missed on first looking at it....which led me to the possible theory of it being a Niepce...but I bow to your superior knowledge on this.
I guess we will never know for sure but the inconsistencies in this lovely image cast some doubt for me.
But it has certainly captured my imagination ;D
Carol
-
Thanks again.
I will definitely be making an attempt to get this image copied either by flying out to visit my cousins at some point or paying for them to take it in to a conservator to get them to copy it (and check to see if it needs any love).
Finding images from the 1870s - 1880s is exciting enough but finding an image of an ancestor that predates common photography, especially one who is of such personal interest, is WOW.
I had a look at my copy of Naomi Rosenblum's A World History of Photography[/u] (http://www.abbeville.com/bookpage.asp?ISBN=9780789209467) and Todd Gustavson's Camera: A History of Photography from Daguerreotype to Digital[/u] (http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Camera/Todd-Gustavson/e/9781402756566) last night and in one of them is an exploded view of a Daguerreotype from George Eastman house. About the only way this could be a Daguerreotype would be if it was painted over top of the glass.
We also have to remember that this was made in Scotland and there were many early adopters of Calotypes also in the area (David Octavius Hill etc). Although if this is a DO Hill that someone has painted on that would almost be criminal!
-
I have seen the overpainted textured thing before and had to restore some of it - it was definitely thick gum arabic over dried watercolour :) Whether this one is watercolour I don't know (don't think so, at least not in some parts), but I think it's a similar technique of adding a clear medium over the paint. It's only really in the bits where more depth is needed (dark folds of the coat etc.).
The checks on the leg could be explained by the colour being a wash over the original photo...
Bruce, if it ever gets taken to a conservator, I'd love you to tell us what they determine it is :D We can speculate until the cows come home (and probably will) ;D
Cheers
Prue