ClassyArts Blog

September 17, 2011

Dated Photographer Imprints

Filed under: ClassyArts, Dating Images — ajmorris @ 4:47 pm

One of the most useful photograph dating tools we have is a collection of images that can be dated to an exact or near-exact year. Sometimes the photographer has included the year in their imprint, or added a copyright notice that includes the year. Other times people have written the date on the photograph. With photographs from the 1864-1866 period when a tax stamp was required in the USA, the cancellation on those stamps often include the exact date.

Other images can be dated indirectly. It is not uncommon to find pictures of children or babies with their name and birth date written on them. We can guess the age within a year or so for children under ten. Other times a wedding photo may have the names of the parties involved. With photos like those, a bit of genealogical research may provide the year if we can find records for the subjects. In other cases the photographer’s imprint provides the year because they were known to operate at that address only one year, or because is shows a partnership that was similarly short-lived.

All told, we find about 5% or less of antique photographs have enough associated information to be able to confidently date them within a year or two. Those dated photographs can then be used to help date the other 95% of images for which we have little or no information. All the things we discuss in our dating old photographs section of the ClassyArts site can help us determine at least an approximate date for the undated images. Of all those clues, the photographer’s imprint is one of the best, due to its ubiquity and potential accuracy. Busy city photographers seem to have ordered new cardstock every six months or so; while even country practitioners seem to have rarely used the same imprint for more than two or three years.

Each style of imprint has its own limited term of popularity, but for a really narrow time-frame we need to know when a particular photographer used that particular style. To that end we have begun the Dated Photographer Imprint Collection. Derived from our dated images collection, the dated imprints focus just on the photographer imprint — information stamped or printed on the case, card or mat to identify the maker.

Surprisingly, we have less than half as many dated imprints as dated images! A large percentage of the dated images are on unmarked cards. Others have imprints that are duplicates, and we really only need one if no new information is provided. By duplicates we mean the same exact photographer imprint in the same year. Twenty cards showing members of a graduating class may all have the exact same imprints, only one is needed for the dated imprints collection – though the others are still useful in the dated images collection to show the range of clothing and hair styles, for example. If two cards have very similar imprints, but minor differences in typography, we add them both to the imprint collection — they represent different printings of the same basic imprint style. Two such near-matches from the same year suggests the newer one began that year. If we find a match the year before or after, we can then tell which one is the newer or older style.

For most imprints, of course, we are far from having that kind of detail available — but the larger the collection grows the more such information becomes available. Even a single imprint from a particular photographer provides a touchstone — we know matching imprints are probably from within a year or two of the known date, and can often tell from the style if other imprints are newer or older.

So today I put the Dated Photographer Imprint Collection online, beginning with the 835 imprints from 681 photographers indexed so far. That is from less than 1/3 of the dated images we have available, I’ll continue to add more records as time permits. Future monthly progress report blog posts will track that progress. Non-members will only see the list of photographers and the cities, along with comments associated with some imprints. Logged-in members (free or paid) will also see the year and street address (if any) for each imprint. For paid subscribers who have credits available, the names will be linked to images of the imprints, which may be viewed for two credits each. Those images are down-loadable, so paying members may retain those they view for future reference.

Some people have questioned why the images on ClassyArts are available only for a fee, when they are public domain — doesn’t that mean free? No, it does not. Collecting, indexing and making available copies of these images takes a lot of time and effort. Many photo-historians are employed and supported by institutions (which is why most of them give attention to famous photographers and artistic images rather than plebeian portraits of common folk by little-known photographers). Here at ClassyArts you are the only support we have, and if this site does not provide enough income to justify the time spent on it the harsh economic realities require that the time be diverted to more profitable endeavors.

This Dated Photographer Imprints Collection is a good example. If someone were to offer to pay me just $1 for each image in that collection (including additional images as they are added), I would gladly put the whole thing on-line for free access by all who want to use it. But my wife and I have grown too fond of eating to be able to do that without recompense. So support ClassyArts by becoming a subscriber now. We have over 80,000 records in the photographer database, and when that reaches 100,000 subscription prices will be going up — at current rates of growth I expect that be next Spring some time — but current subscribers will have their rates locked-in and not be affected by the increase.

July 3, 2011

ClassyArts Progress to June 30, 2011

Filed under: Artists, ClassyArts, Dating Images — ajmorris @ 1:56 pm

No reports here for a while, but still plenty of progress. In the five months since our last report, we have added 5,326 photographer records and 637 digital images — so we are averaging over 1,000 photographer records and more than 100 new images each month. Last month (June) we exceeded both averages with 1350 new photographer records and 346 images. Considering everything else accomplished in June, that is quite an accomplishment.

The big news is that I have decided to remove the artists database from this site, and replace it with information on dating old photographs. Yes, the artist database is useful, but to an entirely different audience than everything else on the site — so eventually it will become its own site, or I’ll sell the database to someone else. ClassyArts will concentrate on historic photography.

To that end, I’ve written 60% of a new section on dating old photographs, and hope to put it up soon. I have also begun a new database: dated imprints. That database will include the photographer’s imprints (from the case, or front or back of card) for dated images. For card photographs, certain imprint styles suggest a particular date range — but for any particular photographer, the years they actually used a particular imprint is likely to be much narrower. Hence having a dated example of imprints from that photographer can help date other photographs with identical or even similar imprints. In June the dated imprints database reached 385 records. It has not been placed online yet, but will be soon. Most of the 385 images entered so far are from before 1880, when I get up to the year 1900 I’ll put the database online. The photographer names, years and cities will be listed in a public area, while the exact address and image of the imprint will be available to paid subscribers.

One other fun development was added (and written) today — so it is July news but might as well be included here — I wrote a simple program to make a game guessing the date for images. The images are from our public-domain photograph collection, so they are rather small thumbnail images, the originals are not online, but that just adds to the challenge (except in the few cases where the date was written on front of the image large enough to see even in the little thumbnail views). And the back sides are not shown, certainly an important clue for dating images — but hey, it is just a game.

Images are selected at random, so even in a short game you may see duplicates — play for long and you will certainly see the same image more than once. Currently, there are over 300 images in the game. Just go to the Photohistory link at the top of any ClassyArts.com page, and under the Information heading you will see ClassyArts Photo Dating Game, click on that and you will see an image, and a list of decades at the right. Click on the decade that matches the image, and press the submit button. Another image will appear, along with the results of your selection, and the exact year of the preceding image. If you get it right, your total percentage of correct answers is also displayed. There is no limit to how many turns you take — the game never ends on its own — you decide when to stop playing.

One nice thing about that game (for me) is that each dated image I add to our public domain images collection is automatically added to the game. So play again a month from now, and you will likely have a different selection of images available than you saw today. The game grows as our database grows. Have fun with it!

September 30, 2010

Correcting Sarony Misconceptions

Filed under: Dating Images, Photographers — ajmorris @ 12:22 pm

Finally completed a first-version of my timeline for Napoleon Sarony. For complete details and sources, see the original article. Here I’ll give you the executive summary.

The first surprise is that he was not christened Napoleon Sarony, but Gustave Adolphe Napoleon Sarony. None of the existing biographical sketches had much to say about his parentage, other than the ‘fact’ that he learned lithography from his father, who was a Prussian officer at the Battle of Waterloo before emigrating to Canada. Other sources had the father emigrating from England. In fact, he may well have been Prussian, and could even have been at Waterloo, but his occupation was listed as clerk to a perfumer at the time of his wedding in Quebec City in 1818 and later he is listed as a merchant there. Gustave Adolphe Napoleon Sarony was born in 1821 to Adolphus Sarony and Marie Lehoullier.

The family emigrated to New York state in the early 1830s — there are conflicting reports as to whether Napoleon’s mother was still alive — I have not yet resolved that issue. Napoleon’s father became a naturalized citizen of the USA, and as Napoleon was still a minor at the time, he automatically also received citizenship. It is popularly stated that he worked for Currier (of Currier and Ives) in the 1830s, but I did not investigate that possibility. Certainly he must have learned lithography somewhere, because in the 1840s he opens a lithography firm in partnership with Henry B Major. There is another issue that needs further investigation — Henry B Major married Flora A Sarony — was she Napoleon’s sister? And Napoleon married Ellen Major — was she Henry’s sister? I suspect both those questions will be answered positively, but have not yet found the records.

Ellen died in the 1850s, and Napoleon took his children to Europe. His brother Oliver had preceded him to England and established a thriving photographic business there. About 1866 Napoleon Sarony returned to New York and opened his own photographic studio there, at 630 Broadway. Soon afterward he either moved, or the street was renumbered, and the studio address was 680 Broadway.

Most online biographies say he moved out of that studio in 1871 — but I have established beyond doubt that it was May 1st 1876 or 1877 — most probably May 1st 1877.

The new studio at 37 Union Square, was occupied until ‘about 1885′ according to most second-hand reports, but those are all copying from one another. On researcher pegged the date at April 1896, just a few months before Napoleon died. That, I think, is probably correct. At least my observations suggest it was after April 1895.

So we now know that Sarony imprints for these addresses fall in these date ranges:

  1. 630 Broadway – 1866 to 1867 or 1868
  2. 680 Broadway – 1867 or 1868 to 1877
  3. 37 Union Square – 1877 to 1896
  4. 256 Fifth Avenue – 1896+ (continued to be used by son Otto after Napoleon’s death November 1896.)

Other Sarony addresses in the USA are all from after his death: there is still a Sarony studio more than a century later (though in Philadelphia, not New York).

I have begun working on a typology for Sarony imprints, using differences in style, typography, and card-stock to further narrow the dates for each of these locations. To date, I have not found a card with the 630 Broadway imprint, though I have found references to them. If anyone can supply a copy of a card with the 630 Broadway imprint, or any dated cards from 1866 to 1896, your help would be much appreciated. Contact me through this form and I’ll send you my email address. Thanks.

March 1, 2010

Identifying and Dating American Photographs

Filed under: Dating Images — ajmorris @ 6:55 pm

The online ebook I have planned on how to identify and date photographs now has its table of contents online. There are only the first few pages done, on those items that have links on that page. Only paid members of ClassyArts.com have access to those pages. When the whole thing is complete, I will try to make the whole thing available as an ebook, though it may be too large to fit in one PDF file.

The current outline is only partial — the main framework. As I identify more detailed characteristics within those categories, many of them will be broken down further, or existing sub-categories will have additional pages added. The section on Named Motifs of Photographers Imprints/Back Imprints only has half-a-dozen names listed now; I expect that to grow into fifty or a hundred or more.

The format I have settled on is similar to that of the post on this blog on Dating Imprints: Floral Bouquet over Picture Frame, with Camera and Palette with Banners — only the summary table will be the first thing on the page. That way, once you have read the explanation, and understand how the terminology is being used, you can quickly look-up the relevant dates by going to the correct page — and there it will be, first thing.

I have no idea how long it will take me to complete this project — I have several other things going on to keep me busy — but I’ll try to add to this as quickly as I can. There is lots of material I have already written up for other uses (such as the above cited post on this blog), so all I have to do is reformat and clean up the text. Other subjects will require more research, including analysis of example photographs in my dated images collection, which now includes nearly 3,000 images and continues to grow.

Speaking of dated images, I have another blog where I am posting one dated image per week (3000 / 52 — I only have enough material for 57 years worth of posts!) The Dated Images blog is a sub-site of my Genealogy Through Pictures blog, where I try to add a post every few weeks. Give them a visit — but don’t forget to come back here for the latest news!

February 19, 2010

The Changing Face of Photography

Filed under: Dating Images — ajmorris @ 8:31 pm

It always amazes me when I read some historian describe the Carte de Visite (CDV) as an ‘instant hit’ in the United States, after its 1854 invention by Disdéri of Paris. They must not have looked at any major CDV collections.

I have a collection of thousands of digital images of dated photographs, which provides a major component of my research into dating images. I went through and looked at each type of photograph, and counted up the frequencies and distribution by type. I’ll share a summary of that study below.

The Collection

First however, I need to point out some of the limitations of the data. Only a small portion of these images are from my own physical collection of photographs — the rest have been found online, at auction sites and through dealers, family and local history sites, etc. Some of them have dates written on them, others are dated by knowing the dates of birth for young children portrayed, and judging their ages when the photos were taken. Sometimes a photographer’s imprint or copyright notice provides the date. As a whole, the majority of dates appear to be sound — the date fits the style of image and mounting, etc. But I’m sure they are not 100% correct.

Moreover, there is a bias in the collection. Images from 1864-66 are grossly over-represented, because so many of them have dated tax stamps on them. Tintypes and cased images are grossly under-represented, because so few have dates written on them — those formats are just not as easy to write on as a card mounted image.

So take the following conclusions with a large grain of salt. I believe the trends are substantially correct, though the percentages are very approximate.

Remember too that these are images from the United States and Canada, the results would doubtlessly be different if the collection were European based. England, for example, had fewer daguerreotypes and more calotypes. The cabinet card and CDV formats seem to have remained popular longer in Europe than they did here. I have also seen ambrotypes from the 1890s from Britain, though none that late from this side of the Atlantic. I’m sure there are other differences I have not yet noticed as well.

The Data by Decade

1840s

Not surprisingly, 95% of the images from the 1840s were daguerreotypes. The rest were calotypes.

1850s

The 1850s saw the introduction of albumen prints, tintypes, and ambrotypes, as well as salt prints (resembling calotypes but made from glass plate negatives). But daguerreotypes are still 85% of our dated collection for that decade. Ambrotypes make up about 7%, and the other types make up the rest. We have no CDVs from the 1850s, though some American photographers had begun making them by the end of the decade.

1860s

The 1860s probably had the greatest diversity of photograph types, as photographers began to experiment with the various new formats discovered in the preceding decade. Still, it was the CDV that dominated the scene, with 80% of all our dated images being CDVs. Ambrotypes still made up just about 7% of the images, tintypes another 6%, and only 4% were daguerreotypes — and those mostly from very early in the decade. The cabinet card was said to be introduced about 1866, but we have none from the 1860s in the dated images.

1870s

Most of the cased images dropped out of the running, with only very few ambrotype and cased tintypes being seen. The CDV continued to dominate the market, with 80% of our dated images being CDVs. Tintypes grew to 10%, mostly in paper mats. Only 5% of our dated images from the 1870s are cabinet cards.

1880s

The cabinet card comes into domination in this decade, with 65% of all images in the database. CDVs still make up a strong 30%, but the distribution is strongly skewed toward the early years of the decade.

1890s

The cabinet card remains dominant in the 1890s, with 75% of our dated images from that decade. Another 15% are what I call matted images — photographs pasted to a board, but unlike the CDV and cabinet card, there is a wide margin around all sides of the image. Some of these matted images are cabinet-card sized, and so are often lumped in with them, but I believe they are sufficiently significant to deserve their own terminology. The decade also saw a wide variety of mount sizes, both for traditional card-mount styles (where the image is nearly at the edge of the card on three sides) and the newly popular matted formats. Note that matted photographs go back to the 1850s in the collection, but were never frequent enough to deserve mention before the 1890s.

1900s

The first decade of the 20th century saw matted photographs of various sizes dominate the scene, with 70% of all images from the decade. Another new format, the postcard, came into play with 12% of the images. About 7% of images were now left loose, unmounted. Cabinet cards fell to just 5% of our examples, and most for those from the first few years of the decade.

1910s

By the 1910s the photo postcard was all the rage, with 40% of our dated images being that format. The unmounted, snapshot style images grew to 30% of the total, and matted images — mostly the work of professional photographers — dropped to 25%.

1920s

By the roaring 20s almost every family had their own camera, and unmounted prints now dominate the collection at 70%. Matted images fall to 15% of the examples, and postcards just 7%.

1930s

With the 1930s the snapshot percentage continues to increase, with 80% of the images now unmounted. Matted images remain at 15%, representing the professional photographer’s share in the market. Photo postcards are only 4% of the collection for that decade.

1940s

With the 1940s the snapshot continues to dominate numerically, now with 90% of all the images for the decade. Just 7% of the 1940s photos were matted.

Conclusion

These are the broad trends for the first 110 years of photography in Northern North America (i.e. North of the Rio Grande). Within each trend are a variety of smaller sub-trends for variants and elements, that allow us to narrow the date of any particular photograph to a span of from one to five years, depending on the particulars. Exploring those variations and nuances is what the Identifying and Dating American Photographs section of the ClassyArts site is all about. That part of the site will go online soon, for paid subscribers only. Subscribe today and support this work, and also gain access to our huge database of photographers, growing archive of old images, and soon-to-be-added database of lesser-known artists.

Older Posts »

Copyright © 2009 - 2012 by Andrew J Morris