Help needed in dating a photo....

[CJ Max]

If anyone out there can help me in dating this photograph, I would appreciate it very much.

Here is the link: http://www.pbase.com/image/41985990/large

In the album from which it came, it was placed before an image that I know was captured in 1869 although this may be meaningless. The trousers with the stripe down the side are military looking, but they are a tartan design. The image, a tintype, may have been made in either Ontario, Canada, or Michigan, U.S.A. - not certain.

Cliff.

[byRo]

I can't help with a date, just some general observations.

The guy on the left is doing everything to come over as the superior of the two:
1) He sat with the back of the chair turned to the other;
2) His arm over the chair back blocks the other's hand;
3) He has crossed his legs in front of the other's;
4) He has assumed a completely relaxed posed, while the other is tense;

and most imortant..

5) The guy on the right had to sit on a lower seat, so as to not tower over the other.

so, I'd take a guess that this is a father and son shot.

Rô

[Frank Lopes]

The pants are indeed military. This style was common during the Civil War. If I had to guess, I would say this photo was shot between 1866 and 1867. If the gentleman was in the army, chances are he would be in uniform.
Since he is not in uniform but has military pants, it probably was surplus from the war. Since the pants would probably not last more than 2 years, my guess is the photo was taken in 1866 or 1867.

Originally Posted by CJ Max

If anyone out there can help me in dating this photograph, I would appreciate it very much.

Here is the link: http://www.pbase.com/image/41985990/large

In the album from which it came, it was placed before an image that I know was captured in 1869 although this may be meaningless. The trousers with the stripe down the side are military looking, but they are a tartan design. The image, a tintype, may have been made in either Ontario, Canada, or Michigan, U.S.A. - not certain.

Cliff.

[Frank Lopes]

One other interesting detail that I almost missed:

the image is horizontally reversed.

The gentleman with the stripped pants should be on the right not the left.

There are 2 clues:

The pocket with the white handkerchief should be over the left breast not the right one.

The second clue are the buttons. The button holes in a man's jacket or vest are always on the left side, not the right as in the image.

So reverse the image and see how much more natural the poses look.

Originally Posted by CJ Max

If anyone out there can help me in dating this photograph, I would appreciate it very much.

Here is the link: http://www.pbase.com/image/41985990/large

In the album from which it came, it was placed before an image that I know was captured in 1869 although this may be meaningless. The trousers with the stripe down the side are military looking, but they are a tartan design. The image, a tintype, may have been made in either Ontario, Canada, or Michigan, U.S.A. - not certain.

Cliff.

[familytreephoto]

you're right frank - it does look a lot more relaxed and natural flipped around

[BobJones]

Tintypes are always reversed. This was a direct exposure process with the photosensitive layer directly deposited on an opaque substrate. Same thing occurs with Daguerreotypes.

It's going to be difficult to pin down the date without more information. The photo is certainly consistent with the mid 1860s. Tintypes were introduced in 1853 and were very popular by the mid 1850s. However, they were still in use through the early 20th century. Mainly by street photographers in the later years. Studio photographers, for the most part, switched over to a dry plate process around the mid 1880s. So, late 1860s would have been around the middle of the most heavily used period.

Someone with knowledge of clothing trends and styles of that time period could probably narrow the range somewhat.

[Frank Lopes]

BobJones,

you are correct: Tintypes and Daguerreotypes, are reversed.

This image however, I don't think it came from either: it was probably, and this is just a guess, a Calotype. By the time the Civil War came about, it had become the most commom process.

What do you think?

Originally Posted by BobJones

Tintypes are always reversed. This was a direct exposure process with the photosensitive layer directly deposited on an opaque substrate. Same thing occurs with Daguerreotypes.

It's going to be difficult to pin down the date without more information. The photo is certainly consistent with the mid 1860s. Tintypes were introduced in 1853 and were very popular by the mid 1850s. However, they were still in use through the early 20th century. Mainly by street photographers in the later years. Studio photographers, for the most part, switched over to a dry plate process around the mid 1880s. So, late 1860s would have been around the middle of the most heavily used period.

Someone with knowledge of clothing trends and styles of that time period could probably narrow the range somewhat.

[blue dog]

First, I have seen many photo's taken 20 years after the Civil War where someone wore their uniform - especially officers. However, I do think this is during or soon after the CW.

1. These Dandy's aren't farmers. Look at those shoes.
2. I believe that the pant in question is from the Calvary, their's being different from foot soldiers. Note too how narrow the pant leg is, another clue that it might be Calvary.
3. The man stage left has a watch chain that is either horse-hair or human hair, it looks so neat and stiff that I lean towards horse hair > Calvary.

[goose443]

So when you date a photograph, do you pay or do you both split the check?

[Swampy]

I'm guessing 1880's

Compare the cut of the gent on the left's coat and vest with the "sac" coat and "waistcoat" of that 1880s.

Also, I don't recall seeing too many Civil War era photos touting watch fobs. They've been in and out of men's fashion many times, but I think they "came back into fashion" well after the Civil War.

[CJ Max]

You all certainly have given me a lot to think about via your comments. Very insightful. Thanks.

Cliff.

[BobJones]

Hi Frank,

CJ Max apparently had access to the original photo from an album. Perhaps he can fill us in on how the identification was made. I'd be very surprised if it were a Calotype though -- especially if it was made in the U.S. Calotypes were not a commercial success in the U.S., largely because of the steep patent licensing fees. Don't know about Canada. Calotypes were largely phased out by the mid 1850s in favor of the wet collodion process (which was not patented). If taken post civil war, this would be even less likely to be a Calotype. An Ambrotype is a possibility. They were made similar to tintypes but used glass instead of metal. They look very much like tintypes and were packaged similarily. You may need a magnet to tell them apart.

For those not familiar with Calotypes, this was a paper based process which produced a paper negative which was then contact printed, usually on a "salted" paper, to get a positive image. They were typically not washed enough to eliminate the "fixer" solution and they had a strong tendancy to fade and stain with time.

I find the old photographic techniques and the history of photography fascinating.

Bob

[Kraellin]

goose,

it depends on whether the photograph is dutch or not.

craig

[MaryLynn]

I feel I have to add my not-too-expert opinion on this photo. The sleeve on the younger man's jacket is wider at the elbow, an element of style from about 1867-1870.

Having said that, it is difficult to assign a more definite date because we don't know the economic and/or social climate of the family. These men could be wearing clothes that are several years out of style but still good.

Bob, thanks for the information about calotypes. I, too, love the history of these old photos. CJ told us at the outset that this is a tintype.

ML

[BobJones]

I don't know why I didn't do this earlier, I clicked on the link at the top and went back a level to the Photo Restoration & Johnston Family Album page. CJ gives more information about the album and how he got it, the work he's done, and links to the other photos in the album.

It's quite a story and it's really worth taking a look! CJ has done a terrific job on the restorations!

[msfrigyfrog]

all i can say is WOW the restoration work is awesome but what really impressed me was the family history i read every page and you have learned so much of your background. my family on my fathers side is american indian and unfortunately there arent alot of records or living relatives left to get detailed info. i would love to be able to trace my roots as you have done but dont have a clue how to start. im very impressed !!!!

[CJ Max]

Bob,

It's definately a tintype and was made either in Canada or the U.S..

Thanks for your kind comments on my Johnston Family Album gallery. It's been a labor of love. In the next year (or less) I hope to redo all of the tintype images that are posted there. The one with WIlliam and his youngest sister Mary has been redone.

The first "go around" was done from scans that were made by the discoverer of the album who scanned and emailed them to me. She originally thought and hoped that she was related to me and did not want to part with the album. After the better part of 8 months we determined that we were not related, and she graciously made a gift of the album to me. I am very grateful to her for her kindness. I've got a much better scanner than she had access to. I tried one image to see if there would be a significant difference. There is. Now I'll redo the rest of the images.

Again, thanks for your combined efforts to help me in dating the photograph.

Cliff.

[sherilantzy]

The gentlemen in photo #16 appear to be the same gentlemen in photo #17. You said that you are able to place #16 in the year 1869. #17 looks as though the 2 men have aged about 5-7 years which might place photo #17 in about the rangle of 1874-1877.

Sheri

[ahmetturker]

i don't know history,
But, i do a work, only restore.

Nice archive.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CJ Max]

Originally Posted by ahmetturker

i don't know history,
But, i do a work, only restore.

Nice archive.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you. You did a great job of coloring this photo. Thanks!

Cliff.