Old Fashioned Photographs
#11
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: California, USA
Posts: 1,318
I always thought that it was because life was so hard back then. But then my brother, who is a photographer, explained what everyone else has said. They had to stand so still for such a long period of time that they didn't smile. I am surprised that I have rarely seen an old-time picture where someone was photographed with their eyes closed. Which also explains why they have such strange looking expressions in some of the photographs. Can you imagine not blinking for that whole time. Dry eyes, anyone?
#13
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 94
You can blink during a long exposure and not have it show. Those really old pics could take as long as 2 or 3 minutes. So a blink would not be an issue, but any movement of the head or facial muscles would result in a blur.
I have a large collection of family tintypes and daguerreotypes and am extremely fortunate to have names attached to most of them, and some stories as well. One in particular was taken in about 1870, and has my great great grandmother seated, with a child in her lap. Its rare to see daguerreotypes of very young children because you just can't keep a child absolutely still long enough. Well, my great great grandmother was a determined woman, and was proud of her children, and apparently was set on having a picture of that baby. Some baby pictures were achieved by setting the child on a fabric drape and having the parent grip the child firmly thru the drape, so that the steadying hands did not show, but my ancestress opted to simply hold that baby's head in one hand, and his body with the other. Her firm grip is the first thing most people comment on when they see that picture...but it worked. Unfortunately, if we have the dates correct, it is the only picture of that baby as he passed away, as so many children did those days, before he was even old enough to walk.
I think I have that pic saved on a thumb drive...if I can find it I will add it to this thread.
I have a large collection of family tintypes and daguerreotypes and am extremely fortunate to have names attached to most of them, and some stories as well. One in particular was taken in about 1870, and has my great great grandmother seated, with a child in her lap. Its rare to see daguerreotypes of very young children because you just can't keep a child absolutely still long enough. Well, my great great grandmother was a determined woman, and was proud of her children, and apparently was set on having a picture of that baby. Some baby pictures were achieved by setting the child on a fabric drape and having the parent grip the child firmly thru the drape, so that the steadying hands did not show, but my ancestress opted to simply hold that baby's head in one hand, and his body with the other. Her firm grip is the first thing most people comment on when they see that picture...but it worked. Unfortunately, if we have the dates correct, it is the only picture of that baby as he passed away, as so many children did those days, before he was even old enough to walk.
I think I have that pic saved on a thumb drive...if I can find it I will add it to this thread.
#14
I have some lovely daguerrotypes that I've always displayed. When my boys were little they said it gave them the creeps and couldn't understand why I'd want photos of people I didn't know haha
I got them at antique shops or flea markets.
I got them at antique shops or flea markets.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
olmphoto2
Offline Events, Announcements, Discussions
0
05-04-2011 09:24 AM
gale
General Chit-Chat (non-quilting talk)
14
01-11-2011 07:41 PM