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.
