> One of my distant cousins sent me copies of some old photos. He
> says his mother said her mother-in-law wrote the IDs on the
> back...and the handwriting style is consistent with that.
>
> So, I'm going to use the working hypothesis that the person who
> wrote the IDs knew these people on sight.
>
> It is the second set of photos I've seen where the posed young women
> (groups of sisters) appear to be of African-American Ancestry,
> although the facts in their lives make that no better than a
> one-in-a-million possibility.
>
> The photos are of the cabinet-card era, and show women between 18
> and 25. Is there something im****tant I need to know about the
> photographic process at that time? (g)
>
> N.B.: My issue here is along the lines of, if my sister-the-
> brunette's photo makes her hair reddish-blonde, questions present
> themselves.
>
> Cheryl Singhals <singhals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
There are no definitive answers to your questions. That said, you
may be able to pin down the time frame a bit by researching the
clothing and other accoutrements --- physical objects like bicycles,
toy wagons, parasols and the like.
Cabinet and carte-de-viste photos are monochromatic. Regardless of
the overall tint, they act like B/W photos. Therefore, the color
of hair, etc. is entirely false --- that is to say that it is
impossible to determine beyond a shadow of a doubt what the original
colors were in the scene.
As far as the photographic process of the period is concerned, it
had become more or less standardized. The chemicals used in
processing then is much the same as (wet chemistry) processing is
today. The emulsions are most likely albumen (from eggs) and
therefore a tad more fragile than modern safety films and papers.
If the photographer happened to be a good darkroom technician, the
prints will be very nearly permanent with very little fading.
Regards, Arnold
<><><><><><><><><><><>
Arrowhead Images
<aepalmer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<><><><><><><><><><><>
I've learned that to ignore the facts does not change them.
|
