RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: squiggle on Sunday 04 December 11 15:02 GMT (UK)
-
Hi All,
The first CDV is from my great grandfather's photo album. The same girl appears in his sister's photo album. On the back it says 17 or 19 years old ( I think 19)
A date may really help to narrow it down as to who she might be.
There is nothing on the back. The card is quite thick and the actual photo is quite crudely pasted on the front. It also looks like there was once protective tissue attached at the top edge .
My next question is, could the second picture be of the same girl, What would the date of this one be and would the dates fit?
On the back of this one it is stamped, S.Smale, The Studio, Kingsbridge.
The card measures 1 3/4 inches by 3 inches.
All opinions welcome.
Becky
-
Seems to be the same ear on both ladies.
-
Late 1890s, both of them. Best I can do, sorry :P
Cheers,
China
-
Could they be siblings or cousins perhaps? Or perhaps it is something as mundane as before and after wearing spectacles? :)
-
Hi
Seoras- I too think the ear is similar. I also think the mouth.
China- could you hazzard a guess at which one is earlier. I am posting a anothre one,which looks like it was taken same day. Does the background help with a date?
Redroger- there are two of the spectacles one, one with spectacles and one without. Posting the other one for you!!!
Becky
-
Thanks, I think the two are in fact sisters.
-
It looks like the two pairs were taken the same day.
I think the two with the girl in the darker dress are a bit earlier, but not by much. I think the girl on the left of the last photo is a sister, and all the others are the same girl. If that makes sense :)
-
Thanks China and Roger.
China-I do think, as you that all the others are the same girl. As you say the girl on the left could be/probably is a sister.
Since I thought that the girl in the darker dress looks younger I am pleased that you think that those two are slightly earlier.
I also think that the girl who appears several times is likely to be close family since she appears in the albums of sister and brother. I am still having trouble finding a likely candidate.
I also can't locate the photographer in the censuses around that time. I believe it was a lady called Susan Smale?
Thanks for all you interest
Becky
-
I agree that it appears to be the same young woman in all four photos. I also agree that all four photographs appear to be from the mid to late 1890s based on wardrobe and mount. It appears that you have to pairs of photos, each pair apparently taken around the same time, probably during the same setting.
I’m inclined to say that the photos with “17 or 19” written on the back of them were taken a little earlier than the headshots. When comparing them, it appears that the nose and muzzle area of the face are extended further out and that the top tip of the ear is a bit elongated, indicating growth. While the faces are not in the exact same pose, and even a small degree of difference in angle can make a difference, I’ve overlaid the two images so you can see what I mean. The red lines are of the girl with the white lining, the blue lines the woman in the headshots. Using the left eye and ear as an anchor point, it appears to me some of the features in the photo when the girl is 17 or 19 (red) are a bit more close together than the headshots (blue).
Aside from this I would say that the headshots show a slightly more mature style. The dress seems more adult to me as well as the hair. I don’t believe an adult woman would let her hair down, even partially, as seen in the photo of the 17 or 19 year old.
I would guess you’re looking for someone born between about 1877-1885. In my experience, these sort of group photos of younger folks in the late 19th century weren’t always siblings. Sometimes they were close cousins and sometimes just friends. If your ancestor and his sister didn’t have any other sisters born around this time, I would take a look at their first cousins next.
-
Thank you for your comprehensive response JDJames.
I am sure now (with the side by side and comparison lines) that they are the same girl.
I "was" thinking that the headshot was the earlier of the pairs. I thought that she looked less mature in the face, but I certainly take your point about her having her hair up, and about how faces mature.
I also thought that the style of dress in the 3/4 length one looked like a young teacher.
I have just looked at the back of the other photo of the two girls, and, so feint that I couldn't even see it yesterday- it says "age 17"
I wish I could pin the date down a bit tighter!
Thanks again for your interest!
Becky
-
That sort of information is why the restorers and daters prefer for the card back to be posted too, unless it is completely blank.
-
Hmm…since the girl is labeled concretely as 17 in the younger photos, that might help narrow down a PROBABLE time frame a little bit. Keep in mind, this is just guesswork and not to be taken as anything but guesswork.
The very large mutton sleeves seen in all four of these photographs cropped up in about 1894/1895 and fell very quickly out of fashion after 1900. Now, let’s say about three years have passed between the two sets of photos (I’m saying this because I’d guess your girl is about 20 in the second set of photos, feel free to adjust the following numbers as you see fit if you believe she is older or younger to find your own results). With an approximate three year gap within the original seven year timeframe, that leaves only about an approximate three year buffer on either end of the original timeframe for each photos if we assume she is 20 in the headshots. The earlier photos would have been taken most likely between 1894 and 1896 to comply with the assumptions above. In that case: 1894-17 is 1877 and 1896-17 is 1879. Similarly, the hypothetical buffer for the headshots would be something like 1897 to 1900. If we assume she’s about twenty: 1900-20 is 1880 and 1897-20 is 1877. So, in short, I would say she was most likely born around 1877-1880.
Again, this is a lot of assuming – too much for me to be comfortably in narrow down my original estimate of 1877-1885 any more than that for sure - but it’s food for thought.
Any yes, as Redroger mentioned, if you happen to have the opportunity to scan the back of these CDVs, sometimes there are clues there as well that can help narrow down a time frame more positively in the design, logo, or photographer's name.
-
I'm having terrible trouble with my internet connection so I hope I mange to get this posted.....
Thank you for doing the Maths JD!
For completeness here are the two backs... tonight I can't see the writing on the back of the plain one,
I think I need specs and daylight...... The stamp on the back of the head and shoulders one is very basic.
Thanks for looking in again JD and Redroger
Becky
-
To the right of and slightly lower than the written "Age 17" there is an imprint which seems to contain the figures "97" and an oval insignia, can anyone read this?
-
WOW- Redroger, how sharp eyed you are!
I can now see the 97, I can't make out anything further.
I can't believe I've gone from thinking there was nothing on the back, to having two crucial pieces of information.
(It surely can't mean anything other than 1897)
Thank you so much for giving it such close examination :-*
Becky
-
Now I have given it an examination under magnification, the previous was naked eye, and I am almost 72 and have cataracts :) So you were lucky. Under 160% magnification in Irfanview I can see that the oval badge is written on in Old English style script, but I can't read it. It seems to be blurred, and I wonder if it is an impression that has formed through the photo being at the bottom of a pile or under a heavy weight so the impression has been forced through from above?