<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dating Old Photographs &#8211; The Clues that Tintypes Hold, 1890</title>
	<atom:link href="http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/</link>
	<description>Exploring New England As It Was</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Apr 2013 02:50:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Forgotten New England</title>
		<link>http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/#comment-401</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Forgotten New England]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:05:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forgottennewengland.com/?p=1803#comment-401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks - great (and very interesting/engaging) post about the history of photographs!  I&#039;ve added your link to the comments on this post.  Thank you for the follow too!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks &#8211; great (and very interesting/engaging) post about the history of photographs!  I&#8217;ve added your link to the comments on this post.  Thank you for the follow too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathryn Gargolinski</title>
		<link>http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/#comment-398</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kathryn Gargolinski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:59:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forgottennewengland.com/?p=1803#comment-398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fascinating post! If you&#039;re interested in more about the history of tintypes, daguerreotypes, and ambrotypes, we posted a brief history of these three types of early photography on the Skinner Antiques and Fine Art Auctions Blog:
http://www.skinnerinc.com/blog/2011/10/daguerreotypes-ambrotypes-tintypes-the-rise-of-early-photography.php
You can see some great examples of early photography in this post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fascinating post! If you&#8217;re interested in more about the history of tintypes, daguerreotypes, and ambrotypes, we posted a brief history of these three types of early photography on the Skinner Antiques and Fine Art Auctions Blog:<br />
<a href="http://www.skinnerinc.com/blog/2011/10/daguerreotypes-ambrotypes-tintypes-the-rise-of-early-photography.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.skinnerinc.com/blog/2011/10/daguerreotypes-ambrotypes-tintypes-the-rise-of-early-photography.php</a><br />
You can see some great examples of early photography in this post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Forgotten New England</title>
		<link>http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/#comment-387</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Forgotten New England]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2012 13:22:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forgottennewengland.com/?p=1803#comment-387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, sometimes, sitting back and analyzing an old photo is one of the most interesting aspects to genealogy as a hobby.  I agree that the photographs showing only men are more difficult to date - there are some subtle differences in the suits they wear, but these are harder to notice than the differences in women&#039;s fashion.  I find facial hairstyles to be the best clue in men.  My two oldest family photographs show 2nd-great-grandfathers as middle-aged men, both dating to the 1870&#039;s.  One is pretty easy to date because it shows his youngest son, born in 1873, as a toddler.  I have a positive identification on the other; he&#039;s wearing a chinstrap beard.  Those started to go out of fashion around 1870 or so.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, sometimes, sitting back and analyzing an old photo is one of the most interesting aspects to genealogy as a hobby.  I agree that the photographs showing only men are more difficult to date &#8211; there are some subtle differences in the suits they wear, but these are harder to notice than the differences in women&#8217;s fashion.  I find facial hairstyles to be the best clue in men.  My two oldest family photographs show 2nd-great-grandfathers as middle-aged men, both dating to the 1870&#8242;s.  One is pretty easy to date because it shows his youngest son, born in 1873, as a toddler.  I have a positive identification on the other; he&#8217;s wearing a chinstrap beard.  Those started to go out of fashion around 1870 or so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karen K</title>
		<link>http://forgottennewengland.com/2012/02/16/dating-old-photographs-the-clues-that-tintypes-hold-1890/#comment-385</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karen K]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 19:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forgottennewengland.com/?p=1803#comment-385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great post, as usual. Fashions changed in the 19th century just as they did in the 20th. The changes were more subtle, though, and we&#039;re just not as familiar with the fashions of former centuries as we are with the 20th and 21st (please make skinny jeans-- especially on guys-- disappear!)

I&#039;m no expert, but I can tell a photo that was taken in the 1860&#039;s from one that was taken in the 1880&#039;s. It&#039;s easier with women than with men, though, and hairstyles are a good clue. In the early 1880s, for example, curled bangs became popular. 

I know what you mean about people wearing out of date hairstyles-- I still see some women with the &quot;wings&quot; that haven&#039;t been in style since Charlie&#039;s Angels was on prime time. 

Good catch with the photo comparison-- I would definitely think that the photos were taken on the same day, and that the woman is the child&#039;s mother.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, as usual. Fashions changed in the 19th century just as they did in the 20th. The changes were more subtle, though, and we&#8217;re just not as familiar with the fashions of former centuries as we are with the 20th and 21st (please make skinny jeans&#8211; especially on guys&#8211; disappear!)</p>
<p>I&#8217;m no expert, but I can tell a photo that was taken in the 1860&#8242;s from one that was taken in the 1880&#8242;s. It&#8217;s easier with women than with men, though, and hairstyles are a good clue. In the early 1880s, for example, curled bangs became popular. </p>
<p>I know what you mean about people wearing out of date hairstyles&#8211; I still see some women with the &#8220;wings&#8221; that haven&#8217;t been in style since Charlie&#8217;s Angels was on prime time. </p>
<p>Good catch with the photo comparison&#8211; I would definitely think that the photos were taken on the same day, and that the woman is the child&#8217;s mother.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
