# What style of photo printing is this?



## NellsPhoto (Dec 26, 2016)

Hello all, first post here, and it is a QUESTION!

I have had no luck finding answers elsewhere, so here goes:

What style of photography produced this image? By style, I mean print method. The corners are a silvery/metallic color/finish. It is part of a set and research into the topic tells me they were taken around 1879-1880.  The images themselves measure roughly 9.5 x 7.5”.


----------



## jcdeboever (Dec 26, 2016)

My guess would be gelatin silver process. 

Sent from my XT1254 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 26, 2016)

Most likely a silver-gelatin print. The process was adopted quickly after it's introduction in 1871. Same process we use today for darkroom b&w prints. The silvery/metallic look you see in the corners is the result of either/or both original chemical contamination and chemical assault over time that is changing the silver content of the print and turning it to colloidal silver.

Joe


----------



## NellsPhoto (Dec 26, 2016)

Wow, THANKS!  Another forum I asked was too concerned with my posting links and images and no one gave me anything CLOSE to an answer!

There are three photos in the set, and this one is the only one with the silvery corners.  I was thinking it had to do with those old lenses.  Sort of a "binocular view", if that makes sense. 

Another question:  would this image have been captured on a glass negative?  I assume so, given the age, but I am still curious.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 26, 2016)

nells250 said:


> Wow, THANKS!  Another forum I asked was too concerned with my posting links and images and no one gave me anything CLOSE to an answer!
> 
> There are three photos in the set, and this one is the only one with the silvery corners.  I was thinking it had to do with those old lenses.  Sort of a "binocular view", if that makes sense.
> 
> Another question:  would this image have been captured on a glass negative?  I assume so, given the age, but I am still curious.



Yes, glass plate negative, possibly a dry plate but not necessarily -- given the time it could have been wet-plate.

Joe


----------



## NellsPhoto (Dec 26, 2016)

the difference being simply wet vs. dry chemicals on the plate?  Did BOTH use the SAME chemicals?


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 26, 2016)

nells250 said:


> the difference being simply wet vs. dry chemicals on the plate?  Did BOTH use the SAME chemicals?



This was the breakthrough that created the Eastman Kodak Co. In 1851 F. Archer figured out how to get film on glass. The problem with his process was that if you allowed the plates (negatives) to fully dry they became unusable. So from about 1852 for the next 30 years photographers had to make their film in the field on the spot. They would set up a portable darkroom (literally) and go in and make film. They then waited about 10 minutes until the film became tacky but not yet dry and ran out and took the photo. Then they went straight back into the darkroom to develop the film (glass plate) before it dried. Needless to say the minute Archer invented the process everyone started working on a solution to avoid it. They wanted to be able to make the film in advance, dry it, and then use it later and develop it later. Folks with various degrees of success making dry plates started to show up in the late 1870s but it was George Eastman who finally pulled it all together. He invented a plate coating machine in 1879 and opened up for business selling dry plate film in 1880.

That history begs an interesting question regarding your prints. If your dates are accurate you may have photographic prints made from some of the earliest know commercial dry plates. And now the question I ask everyone who comes to me with questions about photographic prints; where's the negatives!

Joe


----------



## compur (Dec 27, 2016)

Assuming the OP's print is on paper, it _could be_ a silver gelatin print as this process did exist in the 1870s but it was crude at that time and mass produced silver gelatin paper was not yet commercially available.

I would say it is more likely to be an albumen print if the date given in the OP is the correct date the print was made. Albumen printing was the dominant method used in the mid to late 1800s until silver gelatin printing began replacing it around the turn of the century (1890s+).



Ysarex said:


> This was the breakthrough that created the Eastman Kodak Co. In 1851


There was no "Eastman Kodak Co. in 1851"

Eastman's company began in the late 1870s and was called the Eastman Dry Plate Co. and the word "Kodak" didn't exist until 1888 when the first Kodak camera was marketed by Eastman.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 27, 2016)

compur said:


> Assuming the OP's print is on paper, it _could be_ a silver gelatin print as this process did exist in the 1870s but it was crude at that time and mass produced silver gelatin paper was not yet commercially available.
> 
> I would say it is more likely to be an albumen print if the date given in the OP is the correct date the print was made. Albumen printing was the dominant method used in the mid to late 1800s until silver gelatin printing began replacing it around the turn of the century (1890s+).
> 
> ...



"In 1851" is the beginning of a new sentence. Arguably I left out a period. The capital I is a give-away. When Eastman invented his dry plate coating machine in 1879 it was the breakthrough that convinced George to quit his day job and go into the photo business full-time which resulted ultimately in the Eastman Kodak Co.

Joe


----------



## compur (Dec 27, 2016)

I see what you intended to say about Eastman but I believe the OP's print is still most likely to be an albumen type, wouldn't you say?


----------



## NellsPhoto (Dec 27, 2016)

Uhoh, I smell a disagreement!  For the record, the photo is indeed on paper, mounted on card.  The reason I know the date range of the set of images can be read about on my blog: 

PART 1     New England Depot: Name That Photo: Bradford MA
PART 2    New England Depot: Name That Photo: Bradford MA - PART 2


----------



## compur (Dec 27, 2016)

Well, if it was printed in 1879-80 then it is most likely an albumen print because that was the most popular photo printing process at that time.  Of course, it could have been printed later using another process such as silver gelatin which was the most popular method in the 1900s.

Are there cracks in the print's surface?


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 27, 2016)

compur said:


> I see what you intended to say about Eastman but I believe the OP's print is still most likely to be an albumen type, wouldn't you say?



Very possibly an albumen print. Also possibly silver gelatin. Silver gelatin was introduced in 1871 and advances back in those days tended to spread fairly quickly so 8-9 years is long enough for it to be silver gelatin, but yes albumen is the other likely candidate.

Joe


----------



## NellsPhoto (Dec 28, 2016)

compur said:


> ...  Are there cracks in the print's surface?



Nope, a nice smooth but matte surface


----------



## NellsPhoto (Jul 28, 2017)

Aaaaaaaaand thanks to Photobucket's new policy, the image I posted in this thread is bye-bye (sigh)


----------



## Ysarex (Jul 28, 2017)

NellsPhoto said:


> Aaaaaaaaand thanks to Photobucket's new policy, the image I posted in this thread is bye-bye (sigh)



You can get around that by making the link direct. In Photobucket click on the magnifier and the image will show full-size. Then right click the image and select View Image from the pop-up menu. Copy the URL and use the photo icon here on the toolbar to paste the image. Like so:







Joe


----------



## NellsPhoto (Jul 28, 2017)

Hmmmmmm...

http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff460/NellsBucket/Train Pics/1880whattype_zps7htfjasg.jpg

Hmmmmmmmmm...
OK, I'll try just uploading to the forum!


----------



## KmH (Jul 28, 2017)

Most photography forums help protect photographer's copyrights, and/or want the protections from copyright infringement lawsuits caused by forum posters posting images they don't have rights to use. US web sites are accorded legal protections _if they have policies in place_ per the US Copyright law OCILLA statutes  -Title 17, Section 512 of the United States Code - a part of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Here at TPF the Guidelines & Rules in part state:
* You agree to only post images and/or other material to which you have exclusive copyright, or permission from the copyright holder that you are able to present to TPF Staff. Under no circumstances will any instance of copyright infringement be tolerated.

If the member suspects a photo is in the Public Domain it is incumbent on the forum member to provide information showing that a posted image is in the Public Domain. Otherwise, forum members are expected to link to a web page where they found a photo rather than posting the photo itself.


----------



## NellsPhoto (Jul 29, 2017)

Once again I have to ask:  How am I supposed to ask a question about what type of photographic process was used if I can't show the image??  I owned the physical photograph.  It was in my collection.


----------



## webestang64 (Jul 29, 2017)

nells250 said:


> The corners are a silvery/metallic color/finish.



That is from age as the photo gets older and was not washed properly you get a shinny silvery look from the fixer left on/in the paper.


----------

