Dating an interesting photograph. . .

[Murph]

Firstly, apologies if this isn't in the right section of the forum. I picked up a couple of ferrotypes at the Hillsville, VA flea market this past September for a song and a dance. Based on the cut of their clothing (especially the latter image) I would assume that both of these images are within the time-frame of the 1860s or so, but I would love to get an opinion from someone who knows more than I do.

The first one, smaller of the two at 3.5" x 2.5", shows evidence of being framed and clearly has some coloration in the face, which is less evident in the digital scan than in on the original.



The second image, my favorite, is larger at 5" x 3.5", and features a dapper young fellow in a nice set of duds with an interesting tasseled cravat and neat muffin-buttons on his trimmed sack coat. Blush on the cheeks is also evident on the original.




Anyway, I've been meaning to share these for a while, and have just gotten around to it. Thanks for looking!

[ScottCross]

Re: Dating an interesting photograph. . .

Based on the format (size) of the 1st tintype, eighth plate, and his clothing, I would date the image to the late 1860s-early 1870s. You don't see this size being produced during the Civil War.
The second image is a bit tricky, since it has been cut down from it's original size, but it probably began life as a half plate tintype 4 1/4" x 5 1/2". You do see half plate tintypes during the Civil War, but they continued making them into the 1870s

[minieball]

Re: Dating an interesting photograph. . .

Agree with Scott's assessment on the two images above.

Ferrotypes, even wet-plate (vs. later dry plate ferrotypes) were made well into the early 20th century so dating extant "tintype" images becomes one of noting clothing and hair styles and to a lesser extent, image size. Smaller sizes were the norm during the early wet-plate era. 1/2 plate and larger images from the 1850's and 1860's are rare.

[MissouriStateGuard]

Re: Dating an interesting photograph. . .

Hello all,

This thread on dating ferrotype images based on sizes has encouraged me to look through my collection, and I found the following examples for your review and input.

1) seated man- size 2 1/2" X 4"; revenue stamp cancelled in November 1864. While there's no evidence of a telltale abrasions left by a cased image mat, this could be an example of a larger plate cut down to this size to better fit an album sleeve.

2) seated woman- size 2 5/8" x 4 1/16"; in a paper protective frame, with patent date of July 9th 1862. The frame suggests to me that enough ferrotype images were being produced in this size to warrant the manufacture of protective sleeves. Interestingly, this is a photographer's copy of another image, as you can see the edge of the original image just below the top.

3) seated Confederate captain- size 2 1/16" x 3 3/16". Found glued inside a protective paper frame, similar to the previous image, but with a rectangular, gilt-edged opening. With the dark ring around the captain, I don't believe this has been cut down from a larger image. Either this was taken by a Southern photographer, or the Northern photographer had no issue with arming a POW :)

4) young man, possibly CS- size 1 3/4" x 2 1/8". Again, had apparently been glued to a paper frame, now lost.

With the latter images, is it possible these are reflective of Southern practices, when, given the scarcity of sheet iron for ferrotypes, and brass for mats and protectors, smaller plates were used and paper frames substituted for cased images?

Please let me know your thoughts,

V/R,
kip

[ScottCross]

Re: Dating an interesting photograph. . .

Kip,

Very good point. These CDV sized images do start appearing during the Civil War and are sometimes found in paper mats. They seem to be the minority when compared to the number of other sized tintypes, which are usually cased. The ones I have seen were taken in the north. It was definately an economy measure and this type of tintype would be the dominant format for tintypes after the Civil War.