SH Archive 19th century Photo Business Advertisement

[KD Archive]

Very often we hear that the reason for not having too many 19th, and early 20th centuries photographs lies within the novelty of the invention. It is often suggested that opportunities to have a photo taken were few and far between. I am not so sure about that, for the amount of the 19th century photo studios, and various other types of private photographers appears to be staggering. Let us take a look at some of the old advertisements.

Year 1900​

Let's start with 1900. It appears to be an obvious date after which any person who wanted to take a photograph could easily do so. For less than $2.00 anyone could buy The Brownie, a roll of film, and get it processed.

The Brownie camera, introduced in February 1900, invented low-cost photography by introducing the concept of the snapshot to the masses. The Brownie was a very basic cardboard box camera with a simple meniscus lens that took 2 1/4-inch square pictures on 117 roll film. The Brownie camera was conceived and marketed for sales of Kodak roll films. Because of its simple controls and initial price of $1 (equivalent to $29 in 2017) along with the low price of Kodak roll film and processing, The Brownie camera achieved and surpassed its marketing goal.

The first model of the camera was invented by Frank A. Brownell. Consumers responded, and over 150,000 Brownie cameras were shipped in the first year of production. Allegedly there were 245,000 first model cameras sold between 1900 and 1901.

An improved model, called No. 2 Brownie came in 1901, which produced larger 2-1/4 by 3-1/4 inch photos and cost $2 and was also a huge success.

​

Brownie (camera)
Kodak Brownie Camera Information - The Original | The Brownie Camera Page
Kodak No.1 Brownie Camera Information | The Brownie Camera Page

Year 1897
​

The first model of the Al-Vista was introduced in c. 1897. The model here is the improved version of c. 1900.

The Al-Vista pre-dates the Kodak Panoram and had many additional features. Looking into the lens, the take-up spool is on the left. As the shutter is tensioned the lens moves to the right. The length of film to be exposed is now set on the top of the camera. When the shutter is released the lens sweeps across the film and is stopped by a bar which was positioned when the exposure length was set. As the lens is stopped by the bar a baffle moves behind the lens to block the light. Advancing the film operates a film counter. A punch is provided so that individual frames can be marked and cut off prior to development.

Al-Vista - Antique and Vintage Cameras

Year 1888​

US inventor George Eastman took an important step forward in the 1880s, when he popularised a flexible film that did away with the need for weighty plates. His first "Kodak Camera" went on sale in 1888, pre-loaded with enough film to take 100 photographs. When the last picture was taken, the entire camera was sent back to Kodak to be developed. It was an uncomplicated box but it cost $25 - a significant amount of money. It was still a device for the wealthy.

Following $1 to $29 (2017) ratio, we end up with approximately $725 in today's money. While this is definitely expensive, it is important to note that quite a lot of people today own cameras which cost way more than that.

George Eastman Camera
The most important cardboard box ever?
Eastman Camera
See What the Oldest Surviving Kodak Camera Looks Like Now

Pre-1888​

It appears that prior to this date if you wanted to take a picture you would have to use services of one of the hundreds of various private photographers.

1842

London Times - Photography Studio Ads, July 16, 1842 ​

1845

Mathew Brady advertisement, April 17, 1845

1848

​

Essentially the amount of Photo Studios snowballs starting with 1842. A very good example of the ads can be seen in the link below:

• Photoset 'Advertisements' by The Patrick Montgomery Collection

1865 - 1890

​

The First 100 Years of Camera Advertising
An Introduction to Photography in the Early 20th Century

* * * * *
​

Essentially, judging by the volume of the surviving advertisement, photography related business was booming starting with approximately 1840s.

By 1840, these advances were enough to pave the way for photography’s professionalization. Mr. Wolcott and Mr. Johnson were the first in the country to open a commercial portrait gallery, and others soon followed. Images in New York cost $3 to $10, a sum that allowed more people than before to see themselves reflected in a portrait, an experience both strange and wonderful.

“They were not all that cheap, but they were so much cheaper than having a painted portrait. It really democratized the whole idea of having your image for yourself,” said Miles Orvell, an English professor at Temple University and the author of American Photography.

By 1844, there were 16 daguerreotype galleries in New York City. Less than a decade later, according to Professor Orvell, there were 86, more than in any other metropolis in the country. The epicenter of the trade was Broadway, home to the largest and most lavish galleries in the city, which served as both studios and exhibition spaces. For Brady, who became famous photographing “men of achievement” including presidents and statesmen, these portrait rooms served a grand social function.

• The Rise of Paper Photography in 1850s France
• The Daguerreian Era and Early American Photography on Paper, 1839–60
• The Hidden History of Photography and New York

KD: I do not see any reason for us to be missing photographic evidence of certain things pertaining to 1840s-1860s, i.e.:

• Where were US flags prior to the Civil War?
• Where is the US Flag on 1826-1855 Washington DC Capitol Building?
• US Congress 1840 - 1860

Note: This OP was recovered from the KeeperOfTheKnowledge archive.

Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.

 

[Wildfire2000]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: WildFire2000
Date: 2018-10-15 03:48:50
Reaction Score: 13

It's amazing what you can find when you start looking. If you were to start asking random people around you about the history of photography and whatever, I sincerely doubt many would have a clue as to the detailed history you just brought out. No one seems to CARE. We're brought up with a very specific level of historical training with a carefully constructed view that no one bothers to look or question, especially when the people that start stepping outside of 'mainstream' history and science are generally ignored and marginalized into obscurity. The walls of our prison are carefully hidden, but we can see them if we actually start exploring what we can find. It causes me distress regularly nowadays. I feel so trapped.

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2018-10-15 04:41:33
Reaction Score: 14

Interestingly enough, but in a different thread @whitewave posted a link Who invented camera?

Johann Zahn designed the first camera in 1685. But the first photograph was clicked by Joseph Nicephore Niepce in the year 1814. It was thousands of years back that an Iraqi scientist Ibn-al-Haytham made a mention of this kind of a device in his book, Book of Optics in 1021.

Just plain bizarre.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: esgee1
Date: 2018-10-19 00:20:24
Reaction Score: 2

I think what took so long was developing the materials and formulae processes of capturing and storing an image onto photographic film using chemical treatments. It's quite possible that some of the chemicals required hadn't been invented or discovered until as recently as the last 200 years. Film also uses plastic and that's only been commercially available in the last 200 years.

The original version of plastic film in the late 1800's was highly flammable nitrate film. (You've probably heard about fires in film vaults, 1937 Fox vault fire and 1965 MGM vault fire, and those were due to improper storage of nitrate film. Early X-Ray photography was also done with nitrate film.) It wasn't until the early 1900's that safety film was invented and used, and this was when photography began to go mainstream.

Glass Plate Negative

Prior to the invention of "film", images were captured onto glass plates or silver-plated copper sheets aka daguerrotype. But, both processes required chemistry in order to retain the image. The average person 200 years ago wasn't going to go around taking photos on (cumbersome and breakable) glass plates or copper sheets. So this was a specialized profession or for hobbyists.

19th Century Degeurreotype (corroded by time). Digital restoration (right).

Photography requires a certain knowledge of chemistry. Even with some of the old cameras you mentioned, you still had to mail the camera off to Kodak's lab for them to "develop" your film via chemical means. (Photography dark rooms were dangerous if you didn't know how to handle the chemicals correctly. The average 19th Century person I doubt would dabble with such things.)

Darkroom (19th Century left) (Early 20th Century right).

Inventing the concept of a "camera", optics or camera obscura, was certainly done much earlier like you mentioned. But I think the discovery of how to actually capture an image into a "photo" came much later and more recently. It's always possible that somebody invented a medium for capturing images at an earlier time, but this knowledge has either been lost or suppressed in mainstream history.

Detail of Scheiner's Oculus hoc est (1619) frontispiece with a camera obscura's projected image reverted by a lens.

Photography didn't become mainstream for the average person until the 20th century. Today in the 21st century it's even more so, as we don't use chemical treatments anymore for photography. It's all done electronically via a digital medium. Due to this practically every human being on planet Earth today has the ability to take a photo.

Anyways, these are my thoughts on this fascinating subject. Thanks for your original post!

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ISeenItFirst
Date: 2018-10-19 21:09:28
Reaction Score: 1

Some of what we see as anomolies, I have thought, could be mistakes in developing, or other processing errors. I don't know enough about photography to know the difference. Either way, I didn't want to say, as I've already been accused of shilling for the official story.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: esgee1
Date: 2018-10-20 01:50:33
Reaction Score: 8

Another (possible) ancient photography anomaly is the Shroud of Turin. The theory (proposed by a Nicholas Allen) is that the shroud itself was the medium used to capture the image of a person, via silver bromide and a photographic technique in the 13th century.

aka "Medieval Photography"

I came across this PDF that goes into explanation of this theory. Here is an excerpt:

The Proto-Photography Theory

This theory concludes that the raw materials to produce photography not only existed in medieval times, but that a medieval photographer created a light sensitive emulsion, coated it onto linen cloth and "exposed" this medieval "film" using a room sized camera obscura and a dead body hanging in front of its crystal lens as the subject matter.

He goes on to claim that one half of the Shroud image was exposed at a time, first the ventral and then the dorsal half. He further concludes that it would take about four days to properly expose each half of the cloth, needing at least eight days to complete the entire task. Recently, he modified his theory to include a third exposure for the face, made with a different lens. To prevent the decay of the body during more than a week of exposure to the bright sunlight necessary for adequate exposure of the "film," Allen suggests that the camera obscura was located in a cold climate.

According to this, it took over a week to create the exposure on the cloth.

Here's another blog I found that goes into a lot more detail on the "Medieval Photography" theory. It's an interesting read if you have the time:

A test was even done trying to reproduce the "Medieval Photography" technique used on the shroud:

The Shroud of Turin (left) and Modern reproduction (right).

It's certainly compelling and fascinating if the shroud is indeed a surviving photographic relic from our distant past! I leave it to you all to continue the discussion.