1860 photo or painting ?

I have 2 photos in frames that I bought. One says its dated 1860 and one 1900. They have the names of the people in the pictures on the backs. But I can't seem to figure out if they are paintings or photographs. I have removed the backing of the 1900 one very carefully and it's all glued together with the paper boarder framing. So how do I figure this out. I can see the brush marks on there but someone said they used to do that over photographes to embellish them ? Can you please help .... This is my first post to this site as I'm new to collecting antiques
Thanks in advance , chantelle

 

Hi and welcome!
There those here that will likely tell you what's up with that right off the bat but...I'm not one.
I'm surprised you haven't heard from at least one already but be patient.

 

Welcome, Chantelle! A very interesting question.

I see that you uploaded a picture of both framed portraits to the Media Gallery. It will probably help you get more visibility to attach that picture to this thread as well. Use the little camera icon in the Reply toolbar to embed that picture in a reply here.

Just from what I've seen so far, it does appear that your portraits are some kind of enhanced copies of photographic images. The term "copies" as used here is not a negative term. That "halo" around the subjects is what gives me that feeling - the original image has been redone by the photographer to give them a more formal look. But there doesn't appear to be any "colorizing" (tinted cheeks, color applied to clothing, jewelry, etc.) that is often seen on photographs that were painted over - is that correct - that the only "color" on these is shades of black and grey?

 

Welcome, Chantelle!

 

It appears that these are what are known as solar enlargements or crayon enlargements or crayon portraits. They were very popular in the late 19th and early 20th century. Here is a copyright 1886-1892 book on the subject:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30248/30248-h/30248-h.htm

Basically as I understand it, an enlarged photo was made with with a special camera and then was enhanced with either charcoal, chalk, or paint.
Here is another article with a picture of that type of camera in the middle of the page: http://brightbytes.com/woodward.html

Fig

 

Here's the framed pictures

 

Thanks everyone for the help much better that I can add more photos this way
And yes that's right there is no colour at all in these photos. Here's a close up of her head .

 

Figtree (who posted above about solar enlargements etc.) will no doubt have more to say now that you've attached these additional pics. But it might help if you were to give dimensions - how big is the visible image on each one.

You mentioned that there are names written on the backs? Do you mind sharing them and the geographic location in which the pics were found?

 

Hi! The more you tell the group right off is better for you will be answering even more questions if you don't.
The smallest thing that may not seem important to you may be all it takes to determine what is sought.

 

that's what was attached to hers. Which she was easy to find on Internet. But all his say is George Hill taken late 1800s my G.G Father I'll get measurements ASAP

 

Oh and I found them in Queensland Australia

 

Ah! Australia. How exciting to have family pictures from that long ago.

 

A 'Bounty' indeed...

 

I had looked at them in the gallery but it is better to have them here. I looked again at all of the posts and the only question I could find was what kind of photos they are. My thought about the solar enlargements was the only one I had. I can't really tell more from the photos. Some solar enlargements did not have color added.

If they do turn out to be something else that could be a learning experience for all of us. I had not seen any before with that sort of border.

 

Also, I wanted to say that the woman's clothing does appear to be from the 1860s. However what you have might be a later copy of an 1860s photo. The framing does not date from the 1860s. And since it matches the frame on the man's photo it would date after 1900 if the,date on the man's photo is accurate.

 

I know it is really hard to see from the photos that I have provided. The frames are actually both different. When I bought them I thought the same thing but they both have slightly differnt carvings around the boarders of the wood. Also at first glance I thought the matting boarder was the same as well but it to is slightly differnt. It's driving me crazy to try to understand here how for one they look so closely framed and bordered but his frame definatly has more detailing to his on the edges of the frame it has detail where as here is flat. And hers has more detail in the face of the frame , her frame was also stained a little darker. As well the boarder mat around the photos appear to be the same colours but differnt designs again. On the backs hers looks way older for sure hers is still sealed and looks as though it was never taken out and his has be taken out even before I took it out . Hers it 9 1/2 x 11 1/4 inches . And he measures in at 11 1/2 x15 inches . I have also looked for a connection between these two and haven't seemed to be able to come up with anything. Her family tree is posted on the interenet but he is not in it. I haven't been able to find him with lack of information on him but that doesn't mean I will not keep trying with my spare time. Only a name and a common one at that makes it tough . Her family came from Ireland and they don't have much record on marriage and etc because the building burnt down that held all the documents.
So as far as questions. With the frames being differnt , is it differnt enough to separate them that many years of being framed? Second would these frames have been hand made back then by the same person 20-30 years later ? The mat boarder being its so closely to the same did that change much threw time with colours design etc or do you think that they were framed at the same time ? And then is there any demand for photos of this age or people you don't know ? Or are the frames worth more then the photos with them in them ? I have heard that from different people? And if you are able to can you put a approximate value on these , I know it always depends on who they are but say they are just people with no siignificant history .... I'm not even sure you can ask that on this forum ....
Anyways I would like to thank everyone who has helped me untwist this mystery. What a awesome place for everyone to come together to help another mate out eagerly awaiting your replys !

 

I don't think the frames are different enough to be that far apart in time. There are some people in this forum that know a lot more about frames than I do. I hope one of them stops by here and comments. I might be wrong...

 

I don't know the age of the frames or photos, but do think it's reasonable that both photos were framed around the same time, especially because the mats are so similar.