100 year old picture on glass negative developed in 2004! [Archive]

View Full Version : 100 year old picture on glass negative developed in 2004!

Jon Wilson

4-Mar-2004, 18:52

This is not really a question, but rather an opportunity to share a wonderful find which enables us to look into the past and glory at the wonders of the old ways of photography. Being new to Large Format, I have acquired several old wooden filmholders for my 4x5 Korona and recently purchased two from an Ebay Seller located in California. I soon learned that they were glass negative holders (not the sheet holder as expected). But, when I opened one, I saw a latent picture of a group of young people at either a Church or School. I contacted my local lab, Media Specialties in Boise, ID, and they were able to actually develop the 2nd glass negative by using the one I exposed as a preliminary test for development purposes. I am not certain which chemical process was used, but I was told it took approximately 3 minutes and 15 seconds for the glass plate negative to develop. I am going to try to attach a copy of this picture.

The local historical museum's resident expert for period clothing dates the picture as having been taken between 1898 and 1905. My research has established the picture came from an estate in Wasco, CA (Bakersfield, CA area). It is a picture of 7 young adults, probably their graduation picture in an old country school. If anyone recognizes your relative/ancestor, please let me know and I'll see about getting you a better picture. It just amazes me at the quality of the film and luck of it surviving 100 years to be developed in 2004.

Oh, by the way, the 2nd Filmholder has a glass negative and the film sheet indicates it has not been exposed. I am looking forward to just the right opportunity to expose it. If it comes out, I will let everyone know. The lab estimates the glass negative they developed had an ASA of 1 to 10. Presumably the "unexposed" glass negative is the same. Does anyone have any thoughts, comments, or suggestions.

I have not yet figured out how to upload the picture, sorry. I hope to do so soon. If I can't, just email me and I can send it to you as an email attachment.

Capocheny

4-Mar-2004, 19:43

Jon...

Too cool!

Hopefully, you'll be able to upload it soon. Sorry I can't help there since I've not done it before either. I'm sure somebody will pipe in and give you instructions though. They're a pretty good bunch of folks in this forum.

Cheers

Ralph Barker

4-Mar-2004, 20:17

How cool, Jon. I was born and fetched up in Bakersfield, and my father was born in Maricopa (1917). I'm not sure where you are located, but the county museum in Bakersfield may be able to help identify the location and/or people if you can send them a print.

To display the image here, you need to scan the negative (or a print) first, edit a version of the scan to a reasonable size, and then upload it to a server that is web accessible. Once on a server, you can post the image or the URL (universal resource locator) of the image file.

For more detailed info on posting images, take a look at this page (http://www.rbarkerphoto.com/PostingImages.html) on my site.

4-Mar-2004, 21:57

Wow!!! And I was happy to process some 15 year old Tri-X from my childhood successfully....unbelievable!!!

tim atherton

4-Mar-2004, 22:05

That's cool! Quite amazing actually.

I once bought some old 5x7 graflex holders and they still had film in them. I was hoping they were maybe the Hindenberg or possbily Amelia Erheart - but alas they were blank.

I also once got some Lisco 8x10 holders that were failry well used -obviously form a studio - they had stuf like "Fetish" or "Leather" and "Latex" written in red wax pencil on the darkslides - alas, they had no film in them...

You find is neat though

Bill_1856

4-Mar-2004, 22:16

Definitely Cool!

James Driscoll

4-Mar-2004, 22:44

Tim....I want my holders back.....

Jim Galli

4-Mar-2004, 23:01

Jon was nice enough to share the picture with me earlier in an E-mail and I couldn't resist taking a couple of basic liberties with it in photoshop. Nothing a #4 paper couldn't do also. What amazes me is that Bakersfield Ca. is one of earths hot nasty places. This picture must have withstood 100 excruciatingly hot summers before finally getting souped. Something to be said for emulsions with the speed and veracity of AZO.

1900-1920 School House Plate

Michael E. Gordon

4-Mar-2004, 23:31

Thank you, Jon, for sharing this fun and incredible experience. How simply wonderful!

Shauna Friend of a member

QT Luong

4-Mar-2004, 23:49

Here is a rendition closer to the original scan:

http://largeformatphotography.info/images/school-house-glass-negative.jpg

Erik Asgeirsson

5-Mar-2004, 06:31

This is all really quite remarkable. I'm always amazed to see the few pictures we have from this era in my family, and those are developed prints!

Ken C

5-Mar-2004, 08:01

I don't relly mean to cast aspersions, I'm just naturally skeptical.

Why would someone attempt to take a photo ( shooting into a bright window ) with ASA film (plate) speed of ~1-10, indoors? Surely they would have known how long of an exposure would have been required and would have moved outside. It looks bright outside.

Also, I suspect that even an amateur would have known to place his(her) subjects facing the window in order to maximize the light falling on the subjects, if the photographer was truly concerned about the exposure duration.

On the other hand, someone using modern high speed film taking a picture of people dressed up in 100 year old clothes wouldn't give shooting indoors a second thought.

Just asking questions, not making accusations.

Donal Taylor

5-Mar-2004, 08:24

"On the other hand, someone using modern high speed film taking a picture of people dressed up in 100 year old clothes wouldn't give shooting indoors a second thought."

Well, none of them are fat for one thing. It's pretty hard to get a group of seven Americans together today without a generations worth of McDonalds, Donuts Coke and Pizza and the couch potato life style showing it's effect.

Sharon S.

5-Mar-2004, 09:05

...it's amazing to think that someone 100 years ago took this little slice of life in the Central Valley, and now we're able to share in that experience. Thanks for allowing us to enjoy your find!!!

Jay DeFehr

5-Mar-2004, 09:34

Hi Jon. I live in Caldwell, ID. now, but I was born in Fresno, and graduated from high school in Porterville Ca., and know that (Wasco) area well. A very cool find, despite the shortcomings of the photographer. In his defense, he might not have wanted to place his generously dressed subjects in the blazing Wasco sun!

Ken,

1. the negative was glass, which eliminates the possibility of a modern high speed film.

2. A modern amateur or pro would know as well to place his subjects facing the window as one from the turn of the 19th century, regardless of the duration of exposure. I suspect that the location of the bench determined the arrangement of the subjects, with the location of the window being an unfortunate coincidence.

Dan Ingram

5-Mar-2004, 12:30

Yep -- bad photographers are not a new phenomenon. I've seen family picture collections where the shooter consistently managed to shoot right into the brightest light source available. Of course, maybe this photographer wasn't such a dunce -- after all, the negative was never developed. Maybe s/he realized "D'oh! The window!" and then moved the group outside for the keeper shot? Anyhow, it's pretty cool!

Brian Kennedy

5-Mar-2004, 12:59

I just have to say this is one of the coolest threads I've seen in a long time. I was thinking the same thing as Dan - perhaps this was a reject, and that's why it was never developed? What a terrific surprise!

Mike_4036

5-Mar-2004, 18:57

Hi Jon!

You get to have all the fun! :P What amazed me as much as anything was the flare seemed minimal for the circumstances, and so did the heat damage. I'm working on some old glass negs (from the local county historical society) with my job -- I found you can flat bed scan some then reverse them using photoshop.

Mike

(BTW, he ain't heavy, he's my brother.)

Andre Noble

5-Mar-2004, 19:26

This experience reinforces that there really isn't any such thing as "time" as we understand it.

Cliff Baldwin

20-Mar-2007, 20:52

What an incredible find and image.held up so well,aged like a fine wine.!!as for your glass plate,I have been experimenting with lith film about 6-8 asa.I like Adox MQ developer(diluted 1-1_.I mix this myself from scratch.D76 1-1 works well too.you can heat up the developer to get another stop.also extend the time to get another stop.or just set your flash meter or light meter to asa 1or 4, and go with the f stop it recommends and dev. as normal in D76 1-1.(11 minutes).

walter23

20-Mar-2007, 20:58

Great lab... and this sure beats those thrift store film cannister finds :)

Shen45

20-Mar-2007, 21:01

Tonque in cheek ----

I hear someone found a 100 year old "CD". Debate is still raging as to the real purpose of the item.

David Karp

20-Mar-2007, 21:16

Tonque in cheek ----

I hear someone found a 100 year old "CD". Debate is still raging as to the real purpose of the item.

They were used to scare birds away from fruit trees. One of the major brands supplying these items for this purpose was a company called AOL.

ic-racer

27-Mar-2007, 15:25

I could not help but trying to analyze this facinating phogograph. I placed some lines over the image to help me get an idea about the room.

The Red lines are lines of convergence for the Left hand wall and the Yellow lines are the lines of convergence for the Right hand wall. There is some sort of moulding or baseboard on the right hand wall. We don't know where the floor is. My guess is shown by the white lines.

I can't really tell if the ceiling is showing. I drew a convergence line up there for the right hand wall (not shown) and the angle is pretty steep and does not match any of the irregular density at the top of the photograph.

Scott --

27-Mar-2007, 16:28

Whole thing's amazing. I always wonder, given these found film (plate?) threads, what happened to make someone put an exposed roll/sheet/plate away in the first place. Even if this was a reject, wouldn't they eventually want to use the holder again? Makes it even more remarkable that these things survive.

And a big "hell, yeah!" to an excellent lab. Wish they were near me.

Hollis

16-May-2007, 19:18

I would also like to point out that at the time that this photo was taken, most public spaces, at least the academic types, were well, small. Coupled with the fact that this image was most likely taken in a rural area (due to the location it was found in), I would venture to say that the photographer was right up against the wall. Also, being in a rural area at the time it was taken, electric lit rooms were sparse if not all together unknown. This would lead to an abundance of natural light so i would venture to say that there was another window opposite the one that is visible, hence the subjects closest to the lens (and apparently furthest away from the only visible source) would be the most well lit. Just an idea.

H.

www.hollisbennett.com

j.e.simmons

17-May-2007, 05:56

I helped a friend move a few years ago. He was a snapshooter. I opened an end table drawer to pack the contents and found 117-rolls of undeveloped film. Some folks just don't get around to developing.
juan

bglick

8-Jul-2008, 14:52

racer, what is it that you are trying to say?

ic-racer

8-Jul-2008, 15:21

racer, what is it that you are trying to say?

That post was some time ago. It just demonstrated the principle that the convergence lines from each plane (read 'wall') all meet at the same point. So, things that are not visible (like the edge of the floor and the wall) can be estimated because the convergence lines will point to the same place as those of the visible objects. Just to see if knowing where the floor and wall meet shed any insight on where the people are positioned in the room.

Robert A. Zeichner

8-Jul-2008, 15:45

They were used to scare birds away from fruit trees. One of the major brands supplying these items for this purpose was a company called AOL.

I've been mailed a few of these as I recall. I threw away the CD's but kept the metal tin they came it. I'm a sucker for containers. I later discovered that the tin is the perfect size to carry a spare ground glass for my 4x5. I sandwich the glass between two pieces of 1/8" foam core and tape it all together. It has survived every trip in my checked luggage without incident.

Robert Budding

19-Jul-2008, 16:13

RedDogPatch

30-Sep-2009, 20:38

Not wanting to steal your thread or to upstart your find but..I wanted to share my recent find and, to learn more about how to care for these old glass negatives plus care for them in ways so as not to damage any details. I have come upon dozens upon dozens of perfect glass negatives from an old Photograph Studio that was once located in or near the St Louis, Mo area. As I am but just now finding this site and, still learning, I can't add much more except to be keeping a watchful eye out for info related to my personal quest.:)

Robert Hughes

1-Oct-2009, 08:24

RedDogPatch

1-Oct-2009, 11:32

A helpful reminder for Mr. Red... all bold face is like all caps in forums. WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING!!!?

How have your plates been stored? If you want to keep them in good condition, you probably can keep them in their original containers, as they seem to have worked fine until now.

If you get a chance, how about scanning and uploading an image for our interested audience?

Thanks for the reminder Robert, I was taking the "freedom of expression" to the extreme, for sure but..I am also glad your ears were not hurt..:)
Now to the subject matter at hand..
It's true what you say about the glass negatives lasting to this point, BUT, since the original owner's time, they have been handled and, stacked on top of each other. This is not how I would like to see them preserved. My biggest concerns, for now: What is the proper procedure for cleaning them?(They were not kept in a clean environment in recent years) I don't want to put them in soapy water nor wipe them yet.
As far as displaying a copy, Yes..I plan to do that once I feel they are cleaned, etc.
I can say this. The original photo studio was located in or around the St Louis, Mo.
A few of the landmark photo show a hotel in St. Charles, Mo., called the "St. Charles Hotel" with 19th century street scene.( people, horses, etc) Also, the family portraits are of a higher society gentry, judging by the clothes, bearings of individuals, etc.
I was fortunate to have a small list of names of the individual families attached to some of the negatives.
I hope to be able to share the feeling of the original poster of this thread and, thank for allowing me to share my recent finding here.

Robert Hughes

1-Oct-2009, 17:00

I'd call Library of Congress, Washington DC, and ask for a photo conservator. Describe your situation and what you hope to achieve. Library of Congress is about as close to an ultimate authority on archival preservation as you will find.

RedDogPatch

1-Oct-2009, 20:38

Frances Melhop

2-Oct-2009, 20:25

wow that is a fab story ... I have some small glass plate negs that i bought on ebay too ...i really want to develop the ones that seem to be exposed
would love the details of the address in Boise!!!

Robert Hughes

13-Oct-2009, 09:45

This may also help - from the Light Farm site:

http://www.srmarchivists.org/

RedDogPatch

13-Oct-2009, 18:56

American Institute for Conservation Guides for cleaning, storing, displaying, handling and protecting personal artifacts; information on selecting a conservator, etc. Was one good subject for reviews..
Frances Melhop,
Not sure if this address your question, as I am not sure who your remark was directed to. :)
Update: I have since found out that the St Charles Hotel in the negative was, in fact, located in St Joseph, Mo..~Not in St Charles, Mo..
I am enjoying this detective work..lol
Picture posting will be soon..
http://hrs.boisestate.edu/joblistings/faculty/aa0001-90.shtml

Chris Brown

13-Nov-2009, 09:13

Hello,

My wife and I have about 7 glass negatives that are dated on the bottom 1900 and we were wondering if they are worth any money, and who would I contact to find out ? The sizes of these glass negatives are about 15" wide by about 20" tall. The subject matter in one was taken in an old log cabin with women in huge plantation dresses, looks like something out of gone with the wind. If you have any information for me I would appreciate an email chrisdbrown@att.net.

Thank You Very Much

Michael Filler

16-Nov-2009, 08:58

Regarding the other holder, perhaps containing unexposed film...

While it might be fun to shoot the 100 year old film it may also be that the film has been exposed (maybe the photographer didn't indicate properly).

When I am confronted with a questionable piece of film I always err on the side of assuming the film is exposed. I think it is better to waste/develop a sheet of unexposed film than to waste two shots, the original and the later one.

You can make your own dry plates if you want to experiment with the use of glass. You can't very well undo the double exposure if the glass had been used.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Michael Filler

16-Nov-2009, 09:00

I just realized that the thread started 5 years ago. I guess the 2004 part didn't click in (too early in the morning for me to grasp every little detail, lol). I wonder how it turned out, as over the last 5 years maybe there had been "just the right opportunity" to use those unused plates.