Photo: date or age?

By the way...I can't find the document outlining my logic now, but there is a Cardiff 1911 for a Joseph Henry Pope that seems to match JHP. However, it is NOT he...
Even though both the incoming Canadian manifest and the matching-voyage outgoing UK manifes list that JHP as single (the Canadian says 'carpenter'; the UK says 'labourer') I believe this to be him. The ship sailed in February 1911 before his birthday in June (so age 48 is logical) and before the UK 1911.---Yeates
 
I was doing some searching on Ancestry ca but have received a couple of messages saying they are working on the site so I have not got very far..
The photo greatly reminds me of one taken of my gr.grandfather who is sitting on a stump at a lumber camp in one of the BC Gulf Islands around 1915-1918 so I think the dating is pretty accurate to that era.
There's a couple of sites for tracing old photos....
$$http://www.
deadfred.com/
Also this one through "Family Tree Magazine..
http://blog.
familytreemagazine.com/photodetectiveblog/
 
It is difficult sometimes. A full length picture would have been great - we could have looked at hem lengths, shoes etc I looked more at JHP mainly his suit/waistcoat/tie- the lady in question I struggled a bit although her hair seems to be from a different era I could not make any decisions about her dress. They look a kindly couple and I do think he is close to seventy in the photo. However I am no expert and I am now dying to no more about it. Is it a professional photo? and is there anything on the back
 
gillyflower said:
...her hair seems to be from a different era I could not make any decisions about her dress. ...Is it a professional photo? and is there anything on the back
Click to expand...

Hm. IF this lady came from Canada, she may have been seen as unstylish in appearance. I am thinking 1911 British Columbia could have been rather primitive when compared to London's style of the time.

Oh! Very good point about information on the photo: Imprinted on the bottom of this professionally taken photo is “W.J. Baker & Son, Dulwich & Bromley”. Now, the family home (where Matilda resided for many years) was in Bromley. I’m fuzzy on this, but I think JHP owned property in Croydon---close enough for a trip to the Bromley photo studio? I better stop…speculation getting the better of me.
If the photo dates to 1915 or so, it means JHP is already back in England, if true he ever did go to Canada.---Yeates
 
Yeates said:
Hm. IF this lady came from Canada, she may have been seen as unstylish in appearance. I am thinking 1911 British Columbia could have been rather primitive when compared to London's style of the time.

-Yeates
Click to expand...

:eek: Those are fighting words to a native British Columbian, Yeates... Jan or Doug-- can we please have a smilie with boxing gloves? ;)

BC ( especially Vancouver) was full of Londoner's at the time ...several of them my ancestors.
 
There are some Bromley Commercial Directories on PDFs at
www.
genealogy-specialists.com/threads/photo-date-or-age.1071/page-2
 
I tried loading one of the PDFs for Kelly's Bromley in 1929. (from the above link). It takes ages and ages but once loaded I realised why, there are 540 pages. :( I got to page 195 without finding him, maybe someone has a faster connection.

However, Ancestry have the UK, City and County Directories, 1766 - 1946
1934 Post Office Directory
Under the heading Photographers
Baker W J. 395 Lordship Lane, E. Dulwich SE 22
 
The 1911 census has William James Baker, Photographer.
Born 1874 Oxford and living at 395 Lordship Lane with his wife and 2 children.
Lordship Lane is in the 1911 listed as being in Camberwell, London.
RG14PN2451 SN7

So we have proof that William Baker took photographs from 1911 to 1934 in Lordship Lane. About the same dates as our guesses! ;)
 
Half Hour said:
:eek: Those are fighting words to a native British Columbian, Yeates... Jan or Doug-- can we please have a smilie with boxing gloves? ;)BC ( especially Vancouver) was full of Londoner's at the time ...several of them my ancestors.
Click to expand...

I'm so sorry, Sue. This is the 2nd time this week I've "put my foot in my mouth." At least you admonish with humour---my other person chose a different tack.
Last year I read Roughing it in the Bush by Susanna Moody, a London woman who followed her husband to an unpopulated, still-wild part of Canada. But she would have been in the mid-1800s. I'm afraid her caution forged an image in my mind. Get this paragraph:
p. 515
If these sketches should prove the means of deterring one family from sinking their property, and shipwrecking all their hopes, by going to reside in the backwoods of Canada, I shall consider myself amply repaid for revealing the secrets of the prisonhouse, and feel that I have not toiled and suffered in the wilderness in vain.
Pretty stong sentiment, isn't it?
Also, my father spent months in the NWT which was a supreme experience in his life. And, he was born in Montreal.
Forgive this remark made out of pure ignorance.---Yeates
 
gillyflower said:
Have you tried Googling the studio may get some info?
Click to expand...

In 2011, I found a site listing Baker, William James
Studio at 395 Lordship Lane Dulwich 1900-1938; aka Park Studio
This at
www.
photolondon.org.uk/pages/details.asp?pid=314

Today, googling, got me nowhere other than this photolondon site which is no longer active.

Mutters has found solid info for the photographer as listed above.

Seems via the Internet, it is 8 miles between 395 Lordship Lane Dulwich and 48 Southlands Road, Bromley (an building once owned by JHP).---Yeates
 
Mutters said:
I tried loading one of the PDFs for Kelly's Bromley in 1929. (from the above link). It takes ages and ages but once loaded I realised why, there are 540 pages. :( I got to page 195 without finding him, maybe someone has a faster connection.
Click to expand...

I so worry about wasting your time....please do not unduly turn away from your own work, ruin your eyes and tax your computer on this mystery.---Yeates
 
Yeates said:
I'm so sorry, Sue. This is the 2nd time this week I've "put my foot in my mouth." At least you admonish with humour---my other person chose a different tack.
Last year I read Roughing it in the Bush by Susanna Moody, a London woman who followed her husband to an unpopulated, still-wild part of Canada. But she would have been in the mid-1800s. I'm afraid her caution forged an image in my mind. Get this paragraph:
p. 515
If these sketches should prove the means of deterring one family from sinking their property, and shipwrecking all their hopes, by going to reside in the backwoods of Canada, I shall consider myself amply repaid for revealing the secrets of the prisonhouse, and feel that I have not toiled and suffered in the wilderness in vain.
Pretty stong sentiment, isn't it?
Also, my father spent months in the NWT which was a supreme experience in his life. And, he was born in Montreal.
Forgive this remark made out of pure ignorance.---Yeates
Click to expand...

Don't be sorry...I was giving you a hard time! Wisconsin is pretty back-woodsy as well :D
One of my gr. uncles from Gravesend came to Canada with his 3 sisters and he brought along his girlfriend. According to my 2nd cousin whom I "found" a couple of years ago he gave his bride a rifle to shoot any bears that came around the house when he was at work. This was around 1912 and near Vancouver! He went back to England to fight in WWI and they stayed over there so whether this is true, or just a tale he told his English born grandchildren we will never know!!
I did want to make the point that the people always did dress up, even for shopping. I remember my Mom ( born of English parents in 1917 and raised in Vancouver) going for groceries in the 1950's and we did live in the backwoods and she always put on a dress, stockings and wore gloves :)
I will have to see if I can find that book. Sounds intriguing.
 
Half Hour said:
I did want to make the point that the people always did dress up, even for shopping. I remember my Mom ( born of English parents in 1917 and raised in Vancouver) going for groceries in the 1950's and we did live in the backwoods and she always put on a dress, stockings and wore gloves :)
Click to expand...

My grandmother used to do that even into the 80s (not the stockings and gloves, but a skirt and headscarf); she once made me wait for sweets as she had to change because she wouldn't go to the corner shop in slacks
 
Half Hour said:
Don't be sorry...I was giving you a hard time! Wisconsin is pretty back-woodsy as well :D
One of my gr. uncles from Gravesend came to Canada with his 3 sisters and he brought along his girlfriend. According to my 2nd cousin whom I "found" a couple of years ago he gave his bride a rifle to shoot any bears that came around the house when he was at work. ...I did want to make the point that the people always did dress up, even for shopping. I remember my Mom ( born of English parents in 1917 and raised in Vancouver) going for groceries in the 1950's and we did live in the backwoods and she always put on a dress, stockings and wore gloves :)
I will have to see if I can find that book. Sounds intriguing.
Click to expand...

mugwortismy cat said:
My grandmother used to do that even into the 80s (not the stockings and gloves, but a skirt and headscarf); she once made me wait for sweets as she had to change because she wouldn't go to the corner shop in slacks
Click to expand...

Sue & Mug:
heh…I was going to make the joke about “primitive” Wisconsin but thought better of it as this week I attempt again to learn to think before I speak….
Actually, the bear story was probably true. I’m not sure of the details now, but my daughter lived for a while in a low-population area of northern Wisc and the small town had a garbage-foraging bear for awhile----I used to worry about her as she would run on a trail on the outskirts of the town. And this only a few years ago.
I remember the dressing up and still have the impulse to do so---e.g. last year I traveled by plane and simply COULDN”T wear the super-casual clothes most people wear nowadays. I settled for a gypsy skirt and shirt. True….no more girdles or nylons, thank heavens. But…oh I remember my light brown kid-leather gloves I used to wear whenever we went “downtown” Minneapolis---I loved them and wish I still had them.
The interesting thing about Susanna Moody is that you get a mixed feeling from her---yes, she ended her published journal with that grim warning but, on the other hand, she lived her entire life in Canada---seemed to embrace Canada.--Yeates
 
Someone has challenged me (NOT someone from this forum) that my mystery woman and my great grandmother are the same person. I agree I must remain open-minded and consider this (again.) Also, I think the body language of the photo with the lady and my great grandfather suggests an intimacy and comfort-level more than would a photo of JHP with a sister or aunt. Attached are the two women for side-by-side comparison. Matilda, my great grandmother, is the one with the umbrella---her younger self is my avatar.
I am convinced these are different women. Matilda (with umbrella) has a funny colic in the center of her forehead at the hairline, which I observe in younger photos of her. The other lady has no evidence of this colic. But, definitively for me, is the fact that the lady’s face with the umbrella looks EXACTLY like my father’s face; the other lady bears no resemblance to my father.---Yeates (p.s. annoying...couldn't get images to come in at same size. sorry...)

CompressedMatilda1920.jpgCOMPRESSEDmysteryLady.jpg
 
I did wonder a few days ago if they could possibly be one and the same. I've just zoomed in on all the photos, and would agree that they are two different ladies. There are many facial similarities between your avatar and the lady with the umbrella, but I can't see them in the third image.
 
Yes I agree 100% they are definitely not the same lady. The facial shape and general build are completely different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top