|
|
|
|
A trio of recent tintype acquisitions. I thought they made a nice set for display purposes, so I’ve grouped them together here although they have nothing in common beyond numerical progression.
|
|
|
|
A trio of recent tintype acquisitions. I thought they made a nice set for display purposes, so I’ve grouped them together here although they have nothing in common beyond numerical progression.
Scott, do you know anything about the type of studio (if studio it was) the second and third photo might have been taken in? Often with tintypes they look to be in ramshackle environments with tatty or poorly placed backdrops. Were they most often taken outdoors by travelling photographers? Tintype photography was not prevalent in Australia, so I don’t know much about how the technique was marketed.
Often they were taken by itinerant photographers, which would appear to be the case with #2. I would think #3 was taken in a proper studio because of the physical props (the fake wall behind the right-hand man). These were all made before artificial illumination was powerful enough to allow proper exposures, so studios would have been daylight studios, most often lit by a large skylight, preferably facing north.
Thanks Scott. Very interesting. I like the idea of a “daylight studio”.