Found Treasure, A Portrait of my Grandfather as a Boy

[Doremus Scudder]

It looks like a typical studio portrait from the early decades of the 20th century to me. The olive tone is likely a characteristic of the paper used and not toning. I would suspect that it is a contact print made on a standard silver-gelatin paper of the day.

The metallic sheen you see is called "silvering out," and is a patina that forms from the silver in the image as it starts to degrade somewhat. Usually this is due to atmospheric contaminants or less-than-adequate processing.

There are lots of postcards and portraits from this time that now look a lot like your photograph.

Hope this helps some.

Doremus Scudder

[de-lux]

This is why I've went back to film, it has much better archival properties. I found an old book of kodak prints with each picture printed on a different type of Kodak paper, Kodak used to make such a lot of different type and finishes of paper, but now we're quite limited. I'd say the print of your grandfather was printed on a silver gelatin warm tone type paper, but hasn't been fixed for longer enough which has given it a metallic look, I've also so this effect with old film. Don't know if this effect can be achieved with modern paper as some of the formular has been changed in some papers, and the matallic effect comes with age as far as I know. Some film and papers from the eastern block are best as they're still made in the old ways.

[Brian Ellis]

I certainly understand the emotional attachment of the photograph for you and I think it's admirable that you cared enough about it to take the time to make the video. But from a technical/aesthetic standpoint neither the folder nor the photograph itself are anything unusual. Those kinds of folders were used and those kinds of portraits were made by portrait photographers for years, I have a bunch of the same kind made in the 1920s and forward. As for the photograph itself, like others have suggested it's probably a gelatin silver paper that's been toned with a brown toner or a sepia toner.

I don't know what caused the bluish stuff but as others have said, it likely comes from a lack of care in processing or storage. Whatever the cause, it's probably only going to get worse with time so if you really value the photograph I'd suggest having it duplicated digitally so that you and later generations will have it without the blue sheen.

[BrianShaw]

It looks like a typical studio portrait from the early decades of the 20th century to me. The olive tone is likely a characteristic of the paper used and not toning. ...

... Kodak used to make such a lot of different type and finishes of paper, but now we're quite limited. I'd say the print of your grandfather was printed on a silver gelatin warm tone type paper, but hasn't been fixed for longer enough which has given it a metallic look, ...

Kodak Ektalure paper, perhaps, or something similar??

[sanking]

Not suggesting that the OP do so, but what would happen to a print that shows this kind of patina or shine from silver oxidation if you run it through a fresh fixer? Would this remove the patina or slow down the process in the future.

Sandy

[BrianShaw]

I suspect that the non-archival nature of those old folders might be a major contributor to the degradation. I have an old family wedding picture (1920's) that exhibits similar degradation. It has been in one of those folders since it was printed. First action should be to get the print out of the folder and into an archival envelope.

I have not idea if the original print is salvagable or not, but re-photogrphing to a high-quality interneg and re-printing would be my action. (Some think I'm crazy but more archivists are starting to acknowledge the benefits of "traditional" restorationa nd archivery techniques versus the "scan everything and discard the original" approach that seems to prevail lately.)

[akfreak]

Thanks again for everyones input. I did scan it, I am working to retouch it. I plan to buy an archival envelopes.

@Brian Ellis " But from a technical/aesthetic standpoint neither the folder nor the photograph itself are anything unusual."

I made such a big deal about it because what was once a standard back in the day, would not cost you a small fortune to replicate. It seems mot places want extra $$$ for the slightest effort above standard printing. I have to assume that getting an embossed sleeve was just part of the portrait back in the days. Today that mount/sleeve embossed with beveled corners would cost more than a few dollars.

I guess my point is what was standard back in the day was much better, people took pride in their work and craftsmen, artisans, of most all trades and produced superior products. This kind of quality doesn't seem to be available today with the same attention to detail. If one does find it, they pay through the nose to get it.

Back in the day, simple tools used create superior products. Today complex technology that on average achieve a far less quality product. I know that some of the studios still achieve excellent results.

I would venture to guess those studios would charge a premium to create an image that would represent what I took a video of. This is what I was trying to say

[Doremus Scudder]

Just a short follow-up.

I have a few portraits like this in the family pictures. It seems to me that the olive tone is part of the silver image itself, and not toning, but I could be wrong. In any case the paper base is a cream color and the image an olive green/brown.

As for silvering out or tarnishing, it could be due to contaminants in the sleeve, as Brian points out above, or atmospheric contaminants and/or poor processing.

Take a look at http://nga.gov.au/Conservation/prevention/photos.cfm for more info.

Here's a quote from the site: "Particulate silver, the principal photographic image-forming material in both the 19th and 20th centuries, reacts dramatically to atmospheric contaminants such as hydrogen sulphide and peroxides. Visible deterioration of the photograph or negative will manifest as tarnishing in darker image areas (known as ‘silvering out’), changes in image tone from black to brown (‘sulphiding’) and overall fading. To avoid this, photographs should be mounted and framed or interleaved and stored with archival quality chemically stable acid-free plastics such as polyethylene, polypropylene or polyester. Archival paper products should be neutral pH, unbuffered and lignin, sulphur and peroxide free."

I don't think there is a way to reverse the silvering out, but certainly, the image is good enough to be copied. With proper storage it should last another century or more with luck.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[akfreak]

@Doremus Scudder this a perfect response. Thanks for your time and link. Splendid indeed. AKf

[Brian Ellis]

Thanks again for everyones input. I did scan it, I am working to retouch it. I plan to buy an archival envelopes.

@Brian Ellis " But from a technical/aesthetic standpoint neither the folder nor the photograph itself are anything unusual."

I made such a big deal about it because what was once a standard back in the day, would not cost you a small fortune to replicate. It seems mot places want extra $$$ for the slightest effort above standard printing. I have to assume that getting an embossed sleeve was just part of the portrait back in the days. Today that mount/sleeve embossed with beveled corners would cost more than a few dollars.

I guess my point is what was standard back in the day was much better, people took pride in their work and craftsmen, artisans, of most all trades and produced superior products. This kind of quality doesn't seem to be available today with the same attention to detail. If one does find it, they pay through the nose to get it.

Back in the day, simple tools used create superior products. Today complex technology that on average achieve a far less quality product. I know that some of the studios still achieve excellent results.

I would venture to guess those studios would charge a premium to create an image that would represent what I took a video of. This is what I was trying to say

I think you have some massive over-generalizations here but there's no point in arguing about it. It's nice that you found a portrait of your grandfather and have taken the time to make the video and discuss it here. I would suggest again that you have some copies made digitally so that the on-going deterioration doesn't ultimately leave you and later generations with no photograph at all.