CBlev65252
|
posted on December 9, 2007 07:57:05 AM new
And, in your opinion, is it a girl or a boy? It's hard to tell since they seemed to have dressed the boys and girls pretty much alike back in the "olden days". The frame is very heavy wood.
Cheryl
|
fluffythewondercat
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:08:24 AM new
I don't think christening dresses have changed all that much over the years, plus some families have heirlooms they use. And of course they're worn by both girls and boys.
My first impression was "boy" but I can't say why.
Your best chance of dating the photo may be the piece of furniture s/he's propped up against. I can't see it clearly enough to tell but it almost looks like 40s/50s Hawaiian print barkcloth.
fLufF
--
100% certified cancer-free and polyp-free.
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:10:12 AM new
Fluffy, it's fur.
Cheryl
|
fluffythewondercat
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:12:50 AM new
Told you I couldn't see clearly.
What kind of fur?
fLufF
--
100% certified cancer-free and polyp-free.
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:18:04 AM new
I can't tell what kind of fur. It appears very thick and it may not be real. I think the photo looks like a boy as well.
Cheryl
|
fluffythewondercat
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:43:56 AM new
Perhaps there are some eyes out there that are younger than yours or mine. Anyone?
fLufF
--
100% certified cancer-free and polyp-free.
|
roadsmith
|
posted on December 9, 2007 08:56:53 AM new
I agree you can't tell, but my first impression, like Fluffy's, was a boy. The 1850s diaries my husband and I are transcribing are full of references like "finished a dress for the new baby boy."
I'm not sure there were manufacturers of fake fur in those old days; I think you'd be safe to call it "fur."
The dress is really beautiful! I can imagine some clever seamstress whipping up some of these to sell at high price$.
_____________________
|
pixiamom
|
posted on December 9, 2007 09:30:11 AM new
My guess is 1890's-1910's. Not enough is exposed to tell if it is a girl or a boy! I believe first-time expectant mothers had the time to make these beautiful dresses and reused them for each subsequent child - girl or boy.
|
amber
|
posted on December 9, 2007 09:36:24 AM new
There really is no way to tell. I am from England and my mother was born 1907 and all her brothers who were older wore dresses until they were potty trained. The picture does look English, but maybe that is because I am English. If you found out when sepia photographs finished, at least you would have some idea of the date. I have pictures of my grandparents in sepia pictures in 1898.
|
zippy2dah
|
posted on December 9, 2007 11:07:07 AM new
The fur looks like buffalo. I used to have a bunch of buffalo skins in my home (not by choice) and that is what it brings to mind for me.
Is the baby holding something in its right hand or is something pinned to the dress?
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 9, 2007 12:29:57 PM new
It's a ribbon or something. I can't tell even with the magnifying glass. I'm thinking turn of the century or 1890s.
Cheryl
|
profe51
|
posted on December 9, 2007 12:48:27 PM new
It does look like buffalo. I have an old buffalo robe on the floor and it looks just like that texture.
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 9, 2007 02:19:07 PM new
Buffalo, it is. I did some Google searches and you are right. It does look like Buffalo.
Cheryl
|
ST0NEC0LD613
|
posted on December 9, 2007 09:48:32 PM new
Can anyone date this baby photo?
Now that's sick. Aren't there laws against that?
Personally I would rather date the Mommy photo.
|
MAH645
|
posted on December 9, 2007 10:10:52 PM new
I have a picture in a heavy wooden frame of my mom and her sister taken around 1918. I have one of my dad taken 1909 also in one of those heavy wooden frames with the paper on the back like yours. Your picture looks like a boy and I would say its 1900-1920 era. And why is asking about a baby picture sick? Anyway it looks to be in great shape and it's a beautiful baby.
**********************************
Come to www.bestfreecellularphones for the best deals in cell phones from any carrier. Get your phone FREE or even cash back. Come check us out!
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 10, 2007 04:14:21 AM new
LOL, stone. I get it. Thanks all! I at least have a starting point.
Cheryl
|
photosensitive
|
posted on December 10, 2007 05:33:38 AM new
Cheryl, What is the size of the photograph? Also it appears to have some slight silvering to the edges of the picture. If so this would be "free silver" and may be helpful in dating.
-----o----o----o----o----o----o----o----o
“The illiterate of the future will be the person ignorant of the use of the camera as well as of the pen.”
Maholy-Nagy, Vision in Motion, 1947
[ edited by photosensitive on Dec 10, 2007 05:40 AM ]
|
NEGLUS
|
posted on December 10, 2007 06:17:42 AM new
If it were a postcard I would say "C 1910" but then again, most postcards are "C 1910". The fashion looks like 1910-1920 to me. Just be glad it isn't a photograph of a dead baby (they liked to do that back then).
-------------------------------------
http://stores.ebay.com/Moody-Mommys-Marvelous-Postcards?refid=store
|
tomwiii
|
posted on December 10, 2007 06:23:44 AM new
Neglus:
Could you email Ralphie at:
[email protected]
PLEASE???
Thank you, MommyMarvelous!
Tom & Ralphie
"What me worry?" "childrens do learn"
|
CBlev65252
|
posted on December 10, 2007 08:40:40 AM new
I don't know how large the actual photo is since I haven't taken it out of the frame. The inside measurements of the mat are: 11-7/8" long x 9" wide at the widest. It's a rather large photo. It's not sepia, but black and white. It's hard to photograph because of the glass. I've been tempted to take the photo out, but I don't want to ruin it. The cardboard on the back under the paper should probably be replaced because there's no doubt it's acidic. I haven't decided whether I'm going to keep it or not. Here's the other photo I have (this one is considerably older and HUGE). It creeps my daughter out so she won't go into my room when she comes over. I rescued both from the garbage. The frame on this one is plaster and does have a tiny bit of damage. I love it! I also rescued a 1920's wedding picture, too. That one is also large, but I was unable to salvage the frame.
Cheryl
|
zippy2dah
|
posted on December 10, 2007 08:59:52 AM new
It's very sad when family photos end up in the garbage. I'm glad you were there to rescue them, CB. They may not be with family any longer but thankfully they aren't in a landfill.
|
