RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: seth2 on Thursday 25 August 11 20:22 BST (UK)
-
Hi
Can anyone give me a date on this photograph? Perhaps because of the hat? The man sitting was injured in a mining accident c. 1926, but this photograph is believed to date from after, yet whilst he was still young. He was born in 1900, she in 1905. They lived in a mining village near Barnsley.
Thanks: Seth
-
Around that time,mid - late 20's.
jim
-
Thanks very much Jim
Around that time,mid - late 20's.
jim
-
He looks a fair bit older than 25-30... :-\
-
I was thinking the same as both Jim and Prue.....the lady is wearing mid-late 1920s fashion, especially the cloche hat, but they look too old for the birth dates given. Seth, are you sure these people are who you think they are??
Cheers,
China
-
Older than the dates? Interesting.
Well here is what I was told was the same man taken after an accident c.1928-29. So I suppose photo could have been taken c.30-31 with her about 26 and he about 31, perhaps slightly aged by accident (he was miner)? Ears are pretty distinctive.
Seth
I was thinking the same as both Jim and Prue.....the lady is wearing mid-late 1920s fashion, especially the cloche hat, but they look too old for the birth dates given. Seth, are you sure these people are who you think they are??
Cheers,
China
-
He looks much older in the first picture though doesn't he?
I'm with Prue and China re his age - as opposed to the age of the photo. :-\
Wiggy :)
-
True. He does look older in first. But the injury was close to a breaking of back in mining accident. He recovered rather against the odds. So the experience could have aged him. Also in the second photo he may look gaunter and so possibly younger because he was then recovering from accident.
Seth
He looks much older in the first picture though doesn't he?
I'm with Prue and China re his age - as opposed to the age of the photo. :-\
Wiggy :)
-
Are you sure your first picture couldn't be the injured miner's father?
I agree, don't believe he can have aged so much from your 1928/29 picture to the early 1930's one.
-
To me, the appear to be the same man. The nose is the same in both pics. Perhaps some of the scratches and marks in the first photo are appearing to us as wrinkles?
Christine
-
Thanks for suggestions.
Same man surely. Not merely nose, but cheeks, ears, chin. I can't see significant difference that could not reflect different facial expression and angle. Photos came from his grandaughter. Yes, some seeming wrinkles may be consequence of marks on picture. Even so, the change is not so dramatic.
Perhaps a two year difference seems strained, but it could surely be a four year difference, say 1932 in the later photo with her.
:-\