On 20/01/16 11:10, Richard Smith wrote: > On 19/01/16 01:39, Chris Pitt Lewis via wrote: > >> Phil's original post referred to his having photoshopped the picture >> because it was damaged and had been folded down the middle. There seem >> to be clear signs of damage affecting the right side of the face (left >> half on the photo). If you block out that side, and look only at the >> other, she appears much younger, and could easily be about 14 to 16. > > You're right. That side by itself does look much younger. I'm not > convinced quite as young as 14-16, but clearly much younger than 40. The somewhat pained expression could be due to the need to keep a rigid pose. I notice there's no wedding ring. In fact, she's wearing no jewellery of any kind which might also point to being younger but religious attitudes might come into play. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk

Greetings ! Time to re-visit my snippets site ........ a considerable amount of names added over the last few months. Just drop me a note if you require any extracts. I'm trying something new this time; so when you get to the home page please try out the "Progress Notes" link ........ I would love to have some success on the 'photo identification request Tony Cheal https://sites.google.com/site/newspapersnippets/home tony.teecee@gmail.com

On 19/01/16 01:39, Chris Pitt Lewis via wrote: > Phil's original post referred to his having photoshopped the picture > because it was damaged and had been folded down the middle. There seem > to be clear signs of damage affecting the right side of the face (left > half on the photo). If you block out that side, and look only at the > other, she appears much younger, and could easily be about 14 to 16. You're right. That side by itself does look much younger. I'm not convinced quite as young as 14-16, but clearly much younger than 40. Richard

On 18/01/2016 17:01, Richard Smith via wrote: > > I can't argue with your logic, but I'm really struggling to see that as > a photo of a teenager. Other than the hair style, everything suggests > someone much older. If Phil's great-grandmother was born in 1853, she > might only be 40 when the photo was taken (if she were not as far behind > London fashions as we suppose). I find it easier to believe the picture > is of a youthful-looking 40-year-old than a 16-year-old. > > Richard > Phil's original post referred to his having photoshopped the picture because it was damaged and had been folded down the middle. There seem to be clear signs of damage affecting the right side of the face (left half on the photo). If you block out that side, and look only at the other, she appears much younger, and could easily be about 14 to 16. Chris Pitt Lewis

On 17/01/16 10:42, eve via wrote: >> http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins > I WOULD SAy mid to late 90s, and probably a provicial girl would run a > couple of years behind london fashions. Despite the rather mature look of he > face, the loose long hair suggests she is in her fairly early teens, since adult > women wore their hair up on all formal occasions (certainly for a photo). > This could be a first communion photo, or the last one taken before she was > off into the big world as a domestic/ Say 16? I can't argue with your logic, but I'm really struggling to see that as a photo of a teenager. Other than the hair style, everything suggests someone much older. If Phil's great-grandmother was born in 1853, she might only be 40 when the photo was taken (if she were not as far behind London fashions as we suppose). I find it easier to believe the picture is of a youthful-looking 40-year-old than a 16-year-old. Richard

On 15/01/2016 5:37 PM, Chris Dickinson wrote: > On Thursday, 14 January 2016 05:34:08 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: >> Morning All >> I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is >> damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous >> in the area in the late 1800's) >> I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right >> down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable >> degree. >> I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to >> add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) >> I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating >> the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. >> How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? >> Thanks in Advance >> Phil > > > I have placed the picture at: > > http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins From the pic, and my costuming books, I'd say her clothes were in fashion between 1890 and 1900. The fashion of that era are covered by "The Delineator" which featured Butterick sewing patterns. I'd tip an earlier date within that range though given where the back shoulder seam would need to fall on that jacket to get that style. If you do a search on the name of the mag in google images, you'll see lots of pics from the mag and you can follow through to sites that may (or may not) be of help in firming up the date.

In message <02dd7d9b-8267-45d4-a770-e1d87a266c90@googlegroups.com>, Chris Dickinson <chris@dickinson.uk.net> writes: >On Sunday, 17 January 2016 03:25:29 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: > ><snip> >> (why was the picture kept for a century, if not a family member ???) > > >I don't think that is a problem. When my great-aunt died in the late >1960s, we inherited an 1890s photo of her childhood best friend. My >father knew who it was, but none of us have got round to archiving that >information. So we have kept a non-family-member photo for over 100 >years, and the next generation won't have a clue who it is. Write it on the back of the photo as soon as possible! (_Not_ with anything that will damage the photo, of course.) Or at the very least, on something that will remain with the photo - ideally attached to it, if that can be done without damage (e. g. to the backing if any). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Sarcasm: Barbed ire

Many thanks to those who have replied and responded. In particular thanks to Chris for putting the photo on the web for me. Very much appreciated. It would appear that my first thoughts were incorrect. My Gt Grandmother was born in 1853 and if the outfit was consistent with 1890's fashion then I doubt very much it is her My grandmother was born in 1883 but it definitely is not her, completely wrong facial structure. I have no record of a female sibling so I'm none the wiser. (why was the picture kept for a century, if not a family member ???) Regards Phil <snip>

On Sunday, 17 January 2016 17:18:02 UTC, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > > Write it on the back of the photo as soon as possible! (_Not_ with > anything that will damage the photo, of course.) Or at the very least, > on something that will remain with the photo - ideally attached to it, > if that can be done without damage (e. g. to the backing if any). I know, we should. And probably will. But I have a mischievous temptation to leave this cuckoo in the nest unexplained for the family historians of the next next generation. Chris

In message <fKGdnS9G6rU6lAbLnZ2dnUU7-Q2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au>, Phil Hawkins <cyclopsphil@iinet.net.au> writes: [] >1890's fashion then I doubt very much it is her >My grandmother was born in 1883 but it definitely is not her, >completely wrong facial structure. >I have no record of a female sibling so I'm none the wiser. >(why was the picture kept for a century, if not a family member ???) [] Perhaps someone unrelated, but who was of significance - someone who had been generous, either financially or otherwise, or a beloved nanny or similar? (Not necessarily formal.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf no good deed goes unpunished. This is an iron-clad rule in Netiquette.

aged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous > > in the area in the late 1800's) > > I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right > > down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable > > degree. > > I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to > > add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) > > I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating > > the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. > > How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? > > Thanks in Advance > > Phil > > > I have placed the picture at: > > http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins > > Chris > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENBRIT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message I WOULD SAy mid to late 90s, and probably a provicial girl would run a couple of years behind london fashions. Despite the rather mature look of he face, the loose long hair suggests she is in her fairly early teens, since adult women wore their hair up on all formal occasions (certainly for a photo). This could be a first communion photo, or the last one taken before she was off into the big world as a domestic/ Say 16? EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society

On Sunday, 17 January 2016 03:25:29 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: <snip> > (why was the picture kept for a century, if not a family member ???) I don't think that is a problem. When my great-aunt died in the late 1960s, we inherited an 1890s photo of her childhood best friend. My father knew who it was, but none of us have got round to archiving that information. So we have kept a non-family-member photo for over 100 years, and the next generation won't have a clue who it is.

Thanks for all the replies. I will have a think about which overseas certs I need.

"Chris Dickinson" wrote in message news:186d3fa0-979b-4eb9-ac1c-3edf27f06abe@googlegroups.com... On Thursday, 14 January 2016 05:34:08 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: > Morning All > I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is > damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very > famous > in the area in the late 1800's) > I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right > down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a > reasonable > degree. > I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to > add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) > I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with > dating > the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. > How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? > Thanks in Advance > Phil >I have placed the picture at: >http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins >Chris I have very similar pictures of my great-grandparents with a daughter taken about 1911. Geoff

On Friday, 15 January 2016 06:37:08 UTC, Chris Dickinson wrote: > On Thursday, 14 January 2016 05:34:08 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: > > Morning All > > I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is > > damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous > > in the area in the late 1800's) > > I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right > > down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable > > degree. > > I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to > > add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) > > I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating > > the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. > > How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? > > Thanks in Advance > > Phil > > > I have placed the picture at: > > http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins > > Chris Though there has been only one response since making the picture available, there have been over 40 visits to the page over the last 24 hours. Quite a decent viewing figure.

Chris Dickinson wrote: > On Thursday, 14 January 2016 05:34:08 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: >> Morning All >> I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is >> damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous >> in the area in the late 1800's) >> I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right >> down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable >> degree. >> I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to >> add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) >> I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating >> the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. >> How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? >> Thanks in Advance >> Phil > > > I have placed the picture at: > > http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins > > Chris > According to Wiki, those leg o'mutton sleeves came into fashion in the mid-1890s and remained fashionable, getting larger all the time, until around 1906. Those aren't very big (I have a dated photo of a great aunt in 1900 and her sleeves are enormous over the upper arm and very tight over the forearm), but Grimsby was not the fashion capital of the world and was probably a year or two behind, so I'd say late-ish 1890s. As for her age....most, if not all, adult/near adult women at the time wore their hair up (going by photos of my grandmother born 1883 - her hair was up by the time she was 16 but I gather from what she said when she was an old woman that her mother opposed that bitterly); in this photo, the fact that hers is down might indicate that she is quite young, yet her face looks quite mature - late teens perhaps ? Now tell me how wrong that is with regard to your great grandmother's dates ;) ! -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:34:02 +0800, "Phil Hawkins" <cyclopsphil@iinet.net.au> wrote: >Morning All >I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is >damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous >in the area in the late 1800's) >I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right >down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable >degree. >I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to >add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) >I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating >the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. >How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? Dropbox? Dropbox has a "public folder" and things you put there are accessible by anyone. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

On Thursday, 14 January 2016 05:34:08 UTC, Phil Hawkins wrote: > Morning All > I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is > damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous > in the area in the late 1800's) > I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right > down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable > degree. > I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to > add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) > I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating > the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. > How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? > Thanks in Advance > Phil I have placed the picture at: http://rumbutter.info/philhawkins Chris

On 14/01/2016 05:34, Phil Hawkins wrote: > Morning All > I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is > damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very > famous > in the area in the late 1800's) > I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right > down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a > reasonable > degree. > I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to > add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) > I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with > dating > the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. > How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? > Thanks in Advance > Phil Put it on Flickr. -- Jenny M Benson

Morning All I have just come across an old photo in my late mothers belongings. It is damaged and faded Taken by Lowthian Bros in Grimsby. (Apparently very famous in the area in the late 1800's) I have been able to PS it so as to get the fold out of the centre (Right down the middle of the body) at least to allow it to be seen to a reasonable degree. I have an idea who it is (my Gt Grandmother ), but would like some help to add a reasonable conclusion. (Why didn't they put a name on the back???) I do not have a web site but would like to have you experts help with dating the picture by the outfit and an opinion of the age of the lady. How can I make it available to any who are willing to assist?? Thanks in Advance Phil