<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:pingback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/pingback/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Photo Detective with Maureen A. Taylor - 1870s photos</title>
    <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/</link>
    <description />
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>F+W Media</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:26:27 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>newtelligence dasBlog 2.3.9074.18820</generator>
    <managingEditor>mtaylor@taylorandstrong.com</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>mtaylor@taylorandstrong.com</webMaster>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7</wfw:commentRss>
      <slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>Every so often I bump into a 19th century photo in which the subjects are grinning.
It's a rare event. Occasionally, you see a Mona Lisa smile, but it's difficult to
locate an image from the 19th century where folks actually showed teeth the way we
do today. So, you're probably wondering—why the long face in most pictures?<br /><br />
In the beginning, I imagine that sitters were nervous in front of the camera. It was
new, and having your picture taken was an uncomfortable procedure. 
<br /><br />
Look closely at your early photographs and see if you can spot a posing device such
as a wooden stand behind the subjects' feet. This device sometimes extended as far
up as the head and had clamps around a person's waist or head to keep him still for
the long exposure time. Would you feel like smiling?<br /><br />
In this 1870s tintype, you can see a chair with the adjustable back. This man holds
the the chair back, but if you look closely at his feet, you can see a wooden brace
stand.<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/men046.jpg" alt="men046.jpg" border="0" height="447" width="312" /><br /><br />
You can learn more about photographic patents and these tools in Janice G. Schimmelman's <i>American
Photographic Patents 1840-1880: The Daguerreotype &amp; Wet Plate Era</i> (Carl Mautz,
$25.00). Unfortunately, I don't own a picture of a full clamping device. Anyone got
one to share?<br /><br />
I have a small collection of women and babies I call "hidden mothers." Women hid under
blankets and rugs to keep their babies still for the camera.  In this photo,
a mother or a photographer's assistant braces the toddler for the picture.<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/babies022.jpg" alt="babies022.jpg" border="0" height="413" width="250" /><br /><br />
There were also devices to hold babies that look like medieval instruments of torture.<br /><br />
Let's not forget another reason individuals didn't smile for the photographer: dental
care. Forget cosmetic dentistry—few folks had a full set of pearly whites. In fact,
dentistry was a new profession in the mid-19th century. The online <a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/158069/dentistry/274271/Dentistry-in-18th-and-19th-century-America" target="blank">Encyclopedia
Britannica </a>has a short article on the history of dental care. 
<br /><br />
If you have a picture of a "hidden mother," a smiling ancestor, or a photo that includes
a posing device, <a href="mailto:mtaylor@taylorandstrong.com">email it to me</a> and
I'll post it in this space. Both of the images above are from my research picture
collection.<p></p></div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7" />
      </body>
      <title>Why the Long Faces in Old Photos?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2009/04/06/WhyTheLongFacesInOldPhotos.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:26:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Every so often I bump into a 19th century photo in which the subjects are grinning.
It's a rare event. Occasionally, you see a Mona Lisa smile, but it's difficult to
locate an image from the 19th century where folks actually showed teeth the way we
do today. So, you're probably wondering—why the long face in most pictures?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In the beginning, I imagine that sitters were nervous in front of the camera. It was
new, and having your picture taken was an uncomfortable procedure. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Look closely at your early photographs and see if you can spot a posing device such
as a wooden stand behind the subjects' feet. This device sometimes extended as far
up as the head and had clamps around a person's waist or head to keep him still for
the long exposure time. Would you feel like smiling?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In this 1870s tintype, you can see a chair with the adjustable back. This man holds
the the chair back, but if you look closely at his feet, you can see a wooden brace
stand.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/men046.jpg" alt="men046.jpg" border="0" height="447" width="312"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
You can learn more about photographic patents and these tools in Janice G. Schimmelman's &lt;i&gt;American
Photographic Patents 1840-1880: The Daguerreotype &amp;amp; Wet Plate Era&lt;/i&gt; (Carl Mautz,
$25.00). Unfortunately, I don't own a picture of a full clamping device. Anyone got
one to share?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I have a small collection of women and babies I call "hidden mothers." Women hid under
blankets and rugs to keep their babies still for the camera.&amp;nbsp; In this photo,
a mother or a photographer's assistant braces the toddler for the picture.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/babies022.jpg" alt="babies022.jpg" border="0" height="413" width="250"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
There were also devices to hold babies that look like medieval instruments of torture.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Let's not forget another reason individuals didn't smile for the photographer: dental
care. Forget cosmetic dentistry—few folks had a full set of pearly whites. In fact,
dentistry was a new profession in the mid-19th century. The online &lt;a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/158069/dentistry/274271/Dentistry-in-18th-and-19th-century-America" target="blank"&gt;Encyclopedia
Britannica &lt;/a&gt;has a short article on the history of dental care. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If you have a picture of a "hidden mother," a smiling ancestor, or a photo that includes
a posing device, &lt;a href="mailto:mtaylor@taylorandstrong.com"&gt;email it to me&lt;/a&gt; and
I'll post it in this space. Both of the images above are from my research picture
collection.&lt;p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,7ab49307-0cc5-4809-8cef-456bae55f7b7.aspx</comments>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>children</category>
      <category>men</category>
      <category>photo backgrounds</category>
      <category>women</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>
              <div>
                <div>
                  <div>
                    <div>
                      <div>
                        <div>It's not hard to believe that the three installments of this blog on ancestors'
adorable pets were among the most read. After all, it's family history from a different
perspective—pets in the family. Since this week is the <a href="http://msg.com/dogs/" target="blank&quot;">Westminster
Dog Show</a>, I thought I'd try a different presentation method for the photos.<br /><br />
I've received a few more pictures for this album, but instead of posting them individually,
I incorporated them into a video.<br /><br /><object height="295" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Yc1JQom0e9I&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Yc1JQom0e9I&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="295" width="480"></embed></object><p>
I'm going to tweak it some more and see if I can boost the quality. I produced it
in high definition but uploading it to YouTube compressed the files resulting in some
blurring. 
<br /><br />
Just in case you missed the series:  
<br /><br /><a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Pets+In+Pictures.aspx" target="blank&quot;">Pets
in Pictures</a><br /><br /><a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/An+Album+Of+Ancestors+Family+Pets.aspx" target="blank&quot;">An
Album of Ancestors' Family Pets</a><br /><br /><a href="http://http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Pet+Photos+Our+Ancestors+Loved+Their+Dogs+Too.aspx" target="blank&quot;">Pet
Photos: Our Ancestors Loved Their Dogs, Too!</a><br /><br />
I'd like to thank everyone who sent in pictures!  
<br /></p><p>
(For more genealogy videos, see the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/familytreemagazine" target="blank&quot;"><i>Family
Tree Magazine</i> YouTube channel</a>.) 
</p><p>
BTW—I have a new e-newsletter that lists my speaking schedule,and contains a link
to the Photo Detective video podcast. It's absolutely free. Sign up is on my <a href="http://www.photodetective.com" target="blank&quot;">Web
site</a>.
</p></div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84" />
      </body>
      <title>Pets in the Family on YouTube</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2009/02/10/PetsInTheFamilyOnYouTube.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:13:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;It's not hard to believe that the three installments of this blog on ancestors'
adorable pets were among the most read. After all, it's family history from a different
perspective—pets in the family. Since this week is the &lt;a href="http://msg.com/dogs/" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;Westminster
Dog Show&lt;/a&gt;, I thought I'd try a different presentation method for the photos.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I've received a few more pictures for this album, but instead of posting them individually,
I incorporated them into a video.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;object height="295" width="480"&gt;
&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Yc1JQom0e9I&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1"&gt;
&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;
&lt;param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Yc1JQom0e9I&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="295" width="480"&gt;
&lt;/object&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I'm going to tweak it some more and see if I can boost the quality. I produced it
in high definition but uploading it to YouTube compressed the files resulting in some
blurring. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Just in case you missed the series:&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Pets+In+Pictures.aspx" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;Pets
in Pictures&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/An+Album+Of+Ancestors+Family+Pets.aspx" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;An
Album of Ancestors' Family Pets&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;a href="http://http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Pet+Photos+Our+Ancestors+Loved+Their+Dogs+Too.aspx" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;Pet
Photos: Our Ancestors Loved Their Dogs, Too!&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I'd like to thank everyone who sent in pictures!&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
(For more genealogy videos, see the &lt;a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/familytreemagazine" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;&lt;i&gt;Family
Tree Magazine&lt;/i&gt; YouTube channel&lt;/a&gt;.) 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
BTW—I have a new e-newsletter that lists my speaking schedule,and contains a link
to the Photo Detective video podcast. It's absolutely free. Sign up is on my &lt;a href="http://www.photodetective.com" target="blank&amp;quot;"&gt;Web
site&lt;/a&gt;.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,2e24517f-ce78-413e-935d-0ceb96b0ab84.aspx</comments>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>1880s photos</category>
      <category>1890s photos</category>
      <category>1900-1910 photos</category>
      <category>1910s photos</category>
      <category>1920s photos</category>
      <category>candid photos</category>
      <category>children</category>
      <category>men</category>
      <category>Pets</category>
      <category>Videos</category>
      <category>women</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>
              <div>
                <div>
                  <div>My search for living descendants of the little girl in <a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Finding+Family+Photos+On+The+Web.aspx">Finding
Family Photos</a> on the Web is ongoing. It's a perfect example of how not everything
is on the web. 
<br /><br />
Having looked at census records and whatever else was online, I ran into a virtual
brick wall—I'm sure you know the feeling. Here are some of the sources I learned about
and how I located them. 
<br /><ul><li>
A reference librarian at the Littleton, NH, public library made my day when she found
an obituary for "Fontie" WELLER Fitch in the <i>Littleton Courier</i>, the local newspaper.
After marrying Henry Fitch, Fontenella and her new husband moved to Spokane, Wash.,
so he could accept a job with the Washington National Bank. She gave birth to a child
in January 1892, and within three months, both mother and child were deceased. Their
obituaries appeared in the <i>Littleton Courier</i> March 16, 1892. 
<br /></li></ul><ul><li>
Since I didn't have an obituary for Fontenella's father, I went back and tried locating
one using the historical newspaper subscription site <a href="http://www.genealogybank.com">GenealogyBank</a>.
I finally found it by using <i>Weller</i> in the surname field with <i>Littleton</i> as
a keyword. According to the <i>Argus and Patriot </i>(Montpelier, Vt.) of Dec. 12,
1877,  "Frank G. Weller, a well-known manufacturer of stereoscopic views, died
at his residence in Littleton, NH, on Saturday, aged 44 years." 
<br /></li></ul>
Intrigued by the use of "well-known," I set out to discover more about the man behind
that beautiful photo of a girl and a flag. Just how famous was Weller, and did he
take any other stereo views of his family? 
<br /><br />
A stereo view is a double picture taken with a binocular camera; it captured two slightly
different images of the same view. You then used a special viewer to make the scene
3-D. Stereo views of people are rare. These double images were entertainment—you could
purchase scenes of places you'd visited (or would like to visit) or play out with
friends the tableau scenes in cards with allegorical and literary themes. 
<br />
 <br />
A quick search of the <a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/catalog.html">Library of
Congress Prints and Photographs Online Catalog</a> using <i>F.G. Weller</i> in the
author fieldturned up several images by him. I've posted two here; the other two aren't
online. This one depicts "A Country Choir":<br /><br /><img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11553v%20country%20choir.jpg" alt="weller11553v country choir.jpg" border="0" height="258" width="512" /><br /><br />
In the 1870s, stereo photographers often created thematic scenes from literature.
Without the catalog record, it's difficult to recognize the tableau below. It represents
a card-playing scene from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Harte">Francis
Bret Harte's</a> poem <a href="http://www.bartleby.com/102/200.html"><i>Plain Language
From Truthful James</i>.</a> Harte was a American author who wrote about life in California. 
<br /><br /><img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11554vmen.jpg" alt="weller11554vmen.jpg" border="0" height="249" width="512" /><br /><br />
The back of the card yielded some additional information. I wasn't aware that Weller
had copyrighted his images. The stamp in the upper right hand corner provides a year
for the card-playing view. 
<br /><br /><img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11555rback%20men.jpg" alt="weller11555rback men.jpg" border="0" height="226" width="451" /><br /><br />
Weller was an accomplished photographer. The evidence is in the crisp quality of his
images.  I'd love to see more. 
<br /><br />
In the 1880s, after Weller's death, it's likely the family sold his negatives. His
pictures began to be published by the Littleton View Company, and later, by the major
producer of stereo views, Underwood and Underwood. Some depicted allegorical scenes,
others focused on literature, and in a few instances, he took pictures of local scenes
(as evidenced on a label on the back of one of his views). 
<br /><br />
But he also was one of only two photographers in the pre-1875 period who specialized
in photographing children. He called this series his "Stereoscopic Treasures." Perhaps
he included his daughter and her friends in "The Tea Party" and the "Girl posed with
a Tablet." Unfortunatley, neither is available online for comparision. This additional
information is from John Waldsmith's <i>Stereo Views: An Illustrated History and Price
Guide </i>(Krause, $24.95). 
<br /><br />
Weller was an early stereoscopic photographer, a trailblazer in his field, who also
used his talents to photograph his only child Fontenella. As far I as I know, no single
repository holds Weller's images—they're in private collections or the Library of
Congress. It's a pretty typical situation for a photographer's legacy. 
<p></p></div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef" />
      </body>
      <title>The Weller Family Revisited</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2008/07/28/TheWellerFamilyRevisited.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:42:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;My search for living descendants of the little girl in &lt;a href="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Finding+Family+Photos+On+The+Web.aspx"&gt;Finding
Family Photos&lt;/a&gt; on the Web is ongoing. It's a perfect example of how not everything
is on the web. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Having looked at census records and whatever else was online, I ran into a virtual
brick wall—I'm sure you know the feeling. Here are some of the sources I learned about
and how I located them. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
A reference librarian at the Littleton, NH, public library made my day when she found
an obituary for "Fontie" WELLER Fitch in the &lt;i&gt;Littleton Courier&lt;/i&gt;, the local newspaper.
After marrying Henry Fitch, Fontenella and her new husband moved to Spokane, Wash.,
so he could accept a job with the Washington National Bank. She gave birth to a child
in January 1892, and within three months, both mother and child were deceased. Their
obituaries appeared in the &lt;i&gt;Littleton Courier&lt;/i&gt; March 16, 1892. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Since I didn't have an obituary for Fontenella's father, I went back and tried locating
one using the historical newspaper subscription site &lt;a href="http://www.genealogybank.com"&gt;GenealogyBank&lt;/a&gt;.
I finally found it by using &lt;i&gt;Weller&lt;/i&gt; in the surname field with &lt;i&gt;Littleton&lt;/i&gt; as
a keyword. According to the &lt;i&gt;Argus and Patriot &lt;/i&gt;(Montpelier, Vt.) of Dec. 12,
1877,&amp;nbsp; "Frank G. Weller, a well-known manufacturer of stereoscopic views, died
at his residence in Littleton, NH, on Saturday, aged 44 years." 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
Intrigued by the use of "well-known," I set out to discover more about the man behind
that beautiful photo of a girl and a flag. Just how famous was Weller, and did he
take any other stereo views of his family? 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
A stereo view is a double picture taken with a binocular camera; it captured two slightly
different images of the same view. You then used a special viewer to make the scene
3-D. Stereo views of people are rare. These double images were entertainment—you could
purchase scenes of places you'd visited (or would like to visit) or play out with
friends the tableau scenes in cards with allegorical and literary themes. 
&lt;br&gt;
&amp;nbsp;&lt;br&gt;
A quick search of the &lt;a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/catalog.html"&gt;Library of
Congress Prints and Photographs Online Catalog&lt;/a&gt; using &lt;i&gt;F.G. Weller&lt;/i&gt; in the
author fieldturned up several images by him. I've posted two here; the other two aren't
online. This one depicts "A Country Choir":&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11553v%20country%20choir.jpg" alt="weller11553v country choir.jpg" border="0" height="258" width="512"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In the 1870s, stereo photographers often created thematic scenes from literature.
Without the catalog record, it's difficult to recognize the tableau below. It represents
a card-playing scene from &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Harte"&gt;Francis
Bret Harte's&lt;/a&gt; poem &lt;a href="http://www.bartleby.com/102/200.html"&gt;&lt;i&gt;Plain Language
From Truthful James&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/a&gt; Harte was a American author who wrote about life in California. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11554vmen.jpg" alt="weller11554vmen.jpg" border="0" height="249" width="512"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
The back of the card yielded some additional information. I wasn't aware that Weller
had copyrighted his images. The stamp in the upper right hand corner provides a year
for the card-playing view. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller11555rback%20men.jpg" alt="weller11555rback men.jpg" border="0" height="226" width="451"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Weller was an accomplished photographer. The evidence is in the crisp quality of his
images.&amp;nbsp; I'd love to see more. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In the 1880s, after Weller's death, it's likely the family sold his negatives. His
pictures began to be published by the Littleton View Company, and later, by the major
producer of stereo views, Underwood and Underwood. Some depicted allegorical scenes,
others focused on literature, and in a few instances, he took pictures of local scenes
(as evidenced on a label on the back of one of his views). 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
But he also was one of only two photographers in the pre-1875 period who specialized
in photographing children. He called this series his "Stereoscopic Treasures." Perhaps
he included his daughter and her friends in "The Tea Party" and the "Girl posed with
a Tablet." Unfortunatley, neither is available online for comparision. This additional
information is from John Waldsmith's &lt;i&gt;Stereo Views: An Illustrated History and Price
Guide &lt;/i&gt;(Krause, $24.95). 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Weller was an early stereoscopic photographer, a trailblazer in his field, who also
used his talents to photograph his only child Fontenella. As far I as I know, no single
repository holds Weller's images—they're in private collections or the Library of
Congress. It's a pretty typical situation for a photographer's legacy. 
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,0118940e-d04c-4feb-80fd-f5ff034e50ef.aspx</comments>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>photographers imprints</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab</wfw:commentRss>
      <slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>
              <div>
                <div>A couple of weeks ago I wrote about how <a href="http://www.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Photo+Reunion+Live.aspx">one
genealogist </a>created a short video about her online photo discovery. I was so intrigued
by her effort that I decided to try putting together a short piece with images depicting
flags.  It's one of my collecting areas—I can't turn down a picture of the personification
of flags and other American symbols. You can watch the video on <a href="http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1137819660/bclid240119644/bctid1641807756">Roots
Television</a>. It was only my second attempt at movie-making, so don't be too harsh. 
<br /><br />
One of the photos I included came from the <a href="http://loc.gov">Library of Congress</a> and
serves as a good example of how family photos can also represent history.  It's
a gorgeous stereo view of a young girl dressed as a symbolic figure. 
<br /><br /><img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller.jpg" alt="weller.jpg" border="0" height="252" width="500" /><br /><br />
According to the cataloging record, this image is Fontinelle Weller posed as Columbia,
taken on March 13, 1873, by F.G. Weller of Littleton, N.H.  
<br /><br />
The 1870 census provides additional details. The girl's name was actually Fontanella
A. Weller and F.G. was her father Frank G., a photographer. (You can find this record
using the following citation: 1870 U.S. census. Grafton County, New Hampshire, population
schedule, Littleton, p. 567, dwelling 170, family 191, Frank G. Weller citing National
Archives microfilm publication M 593, roll 841.) 
<br /><br />
I used my Boston Public Library card to find Fontana on the subscription database
Heritage Quest, but you can also locate her using <a href="http://www.ancestry.com">Ancestry.com</a>. 
<br /><br />
The depicting of individuals as symbols of America goes back to the founding of this
country. Fontanella has a serious expression on her face while holding the flag. Her
white Roman-style dress with a crown identifies her as "Columbia, Mother of the Republic." 
<br /><br />
In the late 18th and early 19th century, Columbia was a woman, but as seen here, in
the mid-to later 19th century, she became younger. You can read more about American
symbolism in David Hackett Fischer's <i>Liberty and Freedom: A Visual History of America's
Founding Ideas</i> ( Oxford, $50). 
<br /><br />
If you haven't searched the <a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/catalog.html">Library
of Congress catalog of prints and photographs</a>, try it and see if you can find
images of the members of your family. Anyone out there related to Fontanella? 
According to <a href="http://www.familysearch.org">FamilySearch</a>, she married Henry
Fitch on June 13, 1890. 
<br /><br />
If you've located family photos on the Library of Congress site, let me know by posting
a comment below. 
<p></p></div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab" />
      </body>
      <title>Finding Family Photos on the Web</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2008/07/14/FindingFamilyPhotosOnTheWeb.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:39:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;A couple of weeks ago I wrote about how &lt;a href="http://www.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Photo+Reunion+Live.aspx"&gt;one
genealogist &lt;/a&gt;created a short video about her online photo discovery. I was so intrigued
by her effort that I decided to try putting together a short piece with images depicting
flags.&amp;nbsp; It's one of my collecting areas—I can't turn down a picture of the personification
of flags and other American symbols. You can watch the video on &lt;a href="http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1137819660/bclid240119644/bctid1641807756"&gt;Roots
Television&lt;/a&gt;. It was only my second attempt at movie-making, so don't be too harsh. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
One of the photos I included came from the &lt;a href="http://loc.gov"&gt;Library of Congress&lt;/a&gt; and
serves as a good example of how family photos can also represent history.&amp;nbsp; It's
a gorgeous stereo view of a young girl dressed as a symbolic figure. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/content/binary/weller.jpg" alt="weller.jpg" border="0" height="252" width="500"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
According to the cataloging record, this image is Fontinelle Weller posed as Columbia,
taken on March 13, 1873, by F.G. Weller of Littleton, N.H.&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
The 1870 census provides additional details. The girl's name was actually Fontanella
A. Weller and F.G. was her father Frank G., a photographer. (You can find this record
using the following citation: 1870 U.S. census. Grafton County, New Hampshire, population
schedule, Littleton, p. 567, dwelling 170, family 191, Frank G. Weller citing National
Archives microfilm publication M 593, roll 841.) 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I used my Boston Public Library card to find Fontana on the subscription database
Heritage Quest, but you can also locate her using &lt;a href="http://www.ancestry.com"&gt;Ancestry.com&lt;/a&gt;. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
The depicting of individuals as symbols of America goes back to the founding of this
country. Fontanella has a serious expression on her face while holding the flag. Her
white Roman-style dress with a crown identifies her as "Columbia, Mother of the Republic." 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In the late 18th and early 19th century, Columbia was a woman, but as seen here, in
the mid-to later 19th century, she became younger. You can read more about American
symbolism in David Hackett Fischer's &lt;i&gt;Liberty and Freedom: A Visual History of America's
Founding Ideas&lt;/i&gt; ( Oxford, $50). 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If you haven't searched the &lt;a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/catalog.html"&gt;Library
of Congress catalog of prints and photographs&lt;/a&gt;, try it and see if you can find
images of the members of your family. Anyone out there related to Fontanella?&amp;nbsp;
According to &lt;a href="http://www.familysearch.org"&gt;FamilySearch&lt;/a&gt;, she married Henry
Fitch on June 13, 1890. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If you've located family photos on the Library of Congress site, let me know by posting
a comment below. 
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,41fca9fc-8cf7-49c6-a382-e9d0491a11ab.aspx</comments>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>children</category>
      <category>props in photos</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a</wfw:commentRss>
      <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
      <title>Baby Photos</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2008/03/24/BabyPhotos.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:04:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;In
honor of Women’s History Month, I’ve decided to run another picture of a woman and
baby—but this time only part of the woman appears in the picture. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;I’ve
taken to categorizing images like this as “hidden mothers.”&lt;span style=""&gt; &lt;/span&gt;There's
no way to say for certain the arm extending into the carriage to brace this child
belongs to its mother, but it’s either a cautious mother, a nursemaid or a photographer’s
assistant. I vote for the mother. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;Before
I start dissecting this picture—do you have any images with partial women in them?&lt;span style=""&gt; &lt;/span&gt;I’d
love to see them and feature them next week.&lt;span style=""&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;a href="mailto:mtaylor@taylorandstrong.com"&gt;Send
them to me&lt;/a&gt;. 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;img src="content/binary/43.jpg" border="0"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;So
who’s this darling tot? Gwen Prichard doesn’t know. A genealogical Good Samaritan
gave her the album it was in after finding it in an antique trunk in California. Several
of the people are identified members of the Godfrey and Locke families who, according
to the photographer’s imprint, posed for pictures in Jonesburg, Mo.&lt;span style=""&gt;&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;&lt;span style=""&gt;&lt;/span&gt;The
woman who purchased the trunk wanted family members to have the photo album so she
contacted Jonesburg Historical Society who in turn suggested she write to Gwen. It’s
one of those odd serendipitous genealogical connections.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt; 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
Gwen thinks the album belonged to Olive Cornelia (Locke) Smith (born in 1861) based
on the identified images. Now she’s trying to figure out who else is represented. &lt;span style=""&gt;&lt;/span&gt;This
is one of the mystery pictures. There are four photos on a page—this baby, an older
child, a man and a woman. They may be the baby’s parents, but before jumping to conclusions
let’s date this picture. 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/o:p&gt;
While the baby picture doesn’t have a photographer’s imprint the other three were
taken in Moberly, Missouri. 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;The
light green card stock of this small (4” x 2 ½”) photo was typical in the mid to late
1870s.&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;The
toddler wears a white dress with colored sash and a necklace. This child’s attire
is also typical for the early to mid-1870s.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt; 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
These last two details date the picture, but it’s the baby carriage that draws our
attention. The first carriage that could be pushed was invented in 1848. Before this,
baby carriages were drawn by ponies and other small animals. Newer carriages, like
this one, enabled mothers, nursemaids and nannies to stroll with their children. This
fringed model looks similar to the horse-drawn surrey carriages used by families in
the 1870s. The top would protect the child from the sun. Babies faced front to be
admired by passersby.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
This particular carriage is well padded with an animal fur lining and a checkerboard
knitted blanket. A scalloped edged embroidered cloth decorates the inside. The woman
has her hand underneath this cloth supporting the baby allowing us to see the beautiful
stitching. You can see other examples of early carriages on the &lt;a href="http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/artifacts/archives/002132.asp"&gt;Wisconsin
Historical Society&lt;/a&gt; website. 
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
While this is a picture puzzle, the date brings Gwen one step closer to figuring out
who it might be. This baby (probably a girl because her thin hair in parted in the
middle) was born in the mid-1870s.&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;Anyone interested in helping me narrow the time frame? Check patent records
to see if you can match up the design of this carriage. I’ll give you a hint: The
leading baby carriage designer in this time frame was Adolph Meinecke. Don't forget
you can respond in the Comments field below. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: &amp;quot;Arial&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;sans-serif&amp;quot;; color: black;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,78ec801e-5b4e-4abf-85e5-011d22fbfc9a.aspx</comments>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>children</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4</wfw:commentRss>
      <slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>For genealogists, it's easy to underestimate the power we yield. If you need
proof, think about this: The recent <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119214969916756801.html?mod=todays_us_nonsub_weekendjournal"><i>Wall
Street Journal</i></a>(WSJ) article on <a href="http://www.photodetective.com">The
Photo Detective</a> was the number one article read online at the WSJ for a week!<br /><br />
 This means thousands if not millions of people are interested in their family
photographs. That's great news!<br /><br />
A couple of folks who read that piece commented on the type of gun depicted in the
cover photo. Last year I wrote a column, <a href="http://www.familytreemagazine.com/photos/jun8-06.htm">Hunting
for Clues</a>, about this picture of a hunter. Now new evidence has surfaced. 
<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/060806.jpg" border="0" height="505" width="376" /><br /><br />
There's a lot of discussion about what type of gun appears in the picture and the
date for the image. Faced with the new facts, I could've been off by a few years.
The man wears his old clothes for a soujourn into the wilds of New Jersey. Instead
of just saying his photo is from the late 1860s, I'm stretching the time frame to
include the early 1870s. It doesn't change my analysis, but the additional details
add depth to this image. Here's what turned up:<br /><br />
I spoke with LeRoy Merz of <a href="http://www.leroymerz.com">Merz Antique Firearms</a> about
the gun in the photo. While my original expert was right about it not being a Civil
War piece, it's not a Winchester 66, either. Merz set me straight. It appears to be
a double-barrel shotgun, and the shells around the man's waist are 10-gauge. 
<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/shells.jpg" border="0" height="132" width="252" /><br /><br />
Merz thinks this man holds a European model probably imported from England in the
early 1870s. It was first introduced there in the late 1860s. In England, these shotguns
were used for market hunting of water fowl. (Notice the game bag at the man's side.)
It appears Majorie Osterhout's relative liked to go bird-hunting, probably for duck
or geese, with his trusty four-legged friend. Though the dog (hard to see here) isn't
a traditional breed for retrieving game, it could've been trained for the task. 
<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/dog.jpg" border="0" height="198" width="338" /><br /><br />
Merz's opinion is just one of several. All are in agreement the gun isn't a Winchester
66, but there's still lots of talk about the actual model and the gauge of the shells. 
<br /><br />
Next week, I'll take a look at another earlier column and tell you more of the fascinating
story behind a reader's family photo. 
<br /></div>
          </div>
          <br />
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4" />
      </body>
      <title>Hunting for Clues Part Two</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2007/10/26/HuntingForCluesPartTwo.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:16:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;For genealogists, it's easy to underestimate the power we yield. If you need
proof, think about this: The recent &lt;a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119214969916756801.html?mod=todays_us_nonsub_weekendjournal"&gt;&lt;i&gt;Wall
Street Journal&lt;/i&gt; &lt;/a&gt;(WSJ) article on &lt;a href="http://www.photodetective.com"&gt;The
Photo Detective&lt;/a&gt; was the number one article read online at the WSJ for a week!&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&amp;nbsp;This means thousands if not millions of people are interested in their family
photographs. That's great news!&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
A couple of folks who read that piece commented on the type of gun depicted in the
cover photo. Last year I wrote a column, &lt;a href="http://www.familytreemagazine.com/photos/jun8-06.htm"&gt;Hunting
for Clues&lt;/a&gt;, about this picture of a hunter. Now new evidence has surfaced. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/060806.jpg" border="0" height="505" width="376"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
There's a lot of discussion about what type of gun appears in the picture and the
date for the image. Faced with the new facts, I could've been off by a few years.
The man wears his old clothes for a soujourn into the wilds of New Jersey. Instead
of just saying his photo is from the late 1860s, I'm stretching the time frame to
include the early 1870s. It doesn't change my analysis, but the additional details
add depth to this image. Here's what turned up:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I spoke with LeRoy Merz of &lt;a href="http://www.leroymerz.com"&gt;Merz Antique Firearms&lt;/a&gt; about
the gun in the photo. While my original expert was right about it not being a Civil
War piece, it's not a Winchester 66, either. Merz set me straight. It appears to be
a double-barrel shotgun, and the shells around the man's waist are 10-gauge. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/shells.jpg" border="0" height="132" width="252"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Merz thinks this man holds a European model probably imported from England in the
early 1870s. It was first introduced there in the late 1860s. In England, these shotguns
were used for market hunting of water fowl. (Notice the game bag at the man's side.)
It appears Majorie Osterhout's relative liked to go bird-hunting, probably for duck
or geese, with his trusty four-legged friend. Though the dog (hard to see here) isn't
a traditional breed for retrieving game, it could've been trained for the task. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/dog.jpg" border="0" height="198" width="338"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Merz's opinion is just one of several. All are in agreement the gun isn't a Winchester
66, but there's still lots of talk about the actual model and the gauge of the shells. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Next week, I'll take a look at another earlier column and tell you more of the fascinating
story behind a reader's family photo. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,b3914c06-bf90-43ae-8cc6-e20d6db566b4.aspx</comments>
      <category>1860s photos</category>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>men</category>
      <category>props in photos</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/Trackback.aspx?guid=582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Maureen</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf</wfw:commentRss>
      <slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div>
          <div>Before diving into this week’s identification, I have a question for you: Have
you specified in your will who’ll receive your heritage photos after you’re no longer
here? If not, your relatives could find themselves in a battle. 
<br /><br />
Carolanne, the owner of this week’s photo, has spent 17 years trying to gain ownership
of her great-aunt’s pictures and family history materials. When Addie Mattilda Weed
died in 1990 at age 106, the tenants in her house gave her manuscripts to a university
and kept her photos. 
<br /><br />
Carolanne, Addie’s closest living relative, finally got the photos, but she’s still
battling the university—which currently expects her to pay even to copy the papers.
So, make sure you’ve planned for the future of your genealogy collection.<br /><br />
On to Carolanne’s question: Who are these people? 
<br />
She hopes they’re Addie’s mother, Laura Gilman (1844-1926), and father, James Wyatt
Weed (1839-1888).  
<br /><br /><img src="content/binary/100807a.JPG" border="0" height="272" width="204" />     <img src="content/binary/101507.JPG" border="0" height="273" width="205" /><br />
I think Carolanne’s right. Addie lived her whole life in one house—birth to death.
Since these photos were in that house among her belongings, they’re likely her close
relatives. Also, this couple is the right age to be her parents. 
<br /><br />
That’s easy, but as usual, there are other questions: When were these images created,
and what format are they?  <br /><br />
Both are photographs enhanced with charcoal. Photographers generally took pictures
first, then enlarged and enhanced them—turning an ordinary cabinet-style picture into
a piece of art. I happen own a similar-style image in a large gilt frame. The frames
for these images are missing, and if there were smaller photos, those are unfortunately
lost as well. 
<br />
     
<br />
From about 1869 to 1875 women wore high, ruffled collars, long curls and ties at the
neckline just as in this portrait. Notice her neck ribbon. Since Gilman and Weed married
in 1873, it’s possible this is an engagement or wedding portrait.  <br /><br />
It’s much more difficult to date the picture of her husband, due to the sparse costume
details in his picture. If his picture was done at the same time as Addie’s, he’d
be 34 years old. His beard resembles the untrimmed facial hair men wore in the mid-1870s.
Unlike his wife’s unwrinkled face, he has lines around his eyes, suggesting hard work
that required he squint into the sun. According to the 1880 US census, James Weed
worked in a mill, but I imagine he also spent time outdoors in his native Maine. 
<br /><br />
Caroleann sent a third family photo. I’ll tackle that next week, with a few more things
to say about the three images. ‘Til then…
</div>
        </div>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf" />
      </body>
      <title>Could this happen to your family history treasures? </title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/PermaLink,guid,582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/2007/10/10/CouldThisHappenToYourFamilyHistoryTreasures.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:50:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Before diving into this week’s identification, I have a question for you: Have
you specified in your will who’ll receive your heritage photos after you’re no longer
here? If not, your relatives could find themselves in a battle. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Carolanne, the owner of this week’s photo, has spent 17 years trying to gain ownership
of her great-aunt’s pictures and family history materials. When Addie Mattilda Weed
died in 1990 at age 106, the tenants in her house gave her manuscripts to a university
and kept her photos. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Carolanne, Addie’s closest living relative, finally got the photos, but she’s still
battling the university—which currently expects her to pay even to copy the papers.
So, make sure you’ve planned for the future of your genealogy collection.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
On to Carolanne’s question: Who are these people? 
&lt;br&gt;
She hopes they’re Addie’s mother, Laura Gilman (1844-1926), and father, James Wyatt
Weed (1839-1888).&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img src="content/binary/100807a.JPG" border="0" height="272" width="204"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;img src="content/binary/101507.JPG" border="0" height="273" width="205"&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I think Carolanne’s right. Addie lived her whole life in one house—birth to death.
Since these photos were in that house among her belongings, they’re likely her close
relatives. Also, this couple is the right age to be her parents. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
That’s easy, but as usual, there are other questions: When were these images created,
and what format are they? &amp;nbsp;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Both are photographs enhanced with charcoal. Photographers generally took pictures
first, then enlarged and enhanced them—turning an ordinary cabinet-style picture into
a piece of art. I happen own a similar-style image in a large gilt frame. The frames
for these images are missing, and if there were smaller photos, those are unfortunately
lost as well. 
&lt;br&gt;
&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;br&gt;
From about 1869 to 1875 women wore high, ruffled collars, long curls and ties at the
neckline just as in this portrait. Notice her neck ribbon. Since Gilman and Weed married
in 1873, it’s possible this is an engagement or wedding portrait. &amp;nbsp;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
It’s much more difficult to date the picture of her husband, due to the sparse costume
details in his picture. If his picture was done at the same time as Addie’s, he’d
be 34 years old. His beard resembles the untrimmed facial hair men wore in the mid-1870s.
Unlike his wife’s unwrinkled face, he has lines around his eyes, suggesting hard work
that required he squint into the sun. According to the 1880 US census, James Weed
worked in a mill, but I imagine he also spent time outdoors in his native Maine. 
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Caroleann sent a third family photo. I’ll tackle that next week, with a few more things
to say about the three images. ‘Til then…
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/aggbug.ashx?id=582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf" /&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/CommentView,guid,582a3a10-0c79-4088-bc28-ff490ef9afcf.aspx</comments>
      <category>1860s photos</category>
      <category>1870s photos</category>
      <category>enhanced images</category>
      <category>men</category>
      <category>women</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>