Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


Looking for Photo 2 - Other Civil War Talk - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Wed Mar 14th, 2007 07:47 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
2nd Post
susansweet
Member


Joined: Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 1420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

So you are looking for any photo with a soldier wearing glasses right ?

But it has to be in a group picture not just a soldier alone right ?

Susan



You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Wed Mar 14th, 2007 04:41 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
4th Post
Fuller
E Pluribus Unum


Joined: Mon Oct 23rd, 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 248
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Maybe the nearsighted Conf Gen Felix Zollicoffer should have worn his glasses? :?

Fuller



 Posted: Wed Mar 14th, 2007 05:40 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
5th Post
susansweet
Member


Joined: Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 1420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I did find one portrait with some time of glasses on in my big Civl War photos that is edited by Willaim Davis and Bell Wiley .  They are the pince nez type

 

I was thinking as I was looking last nigh , (up late recovering from food poisoning ) that it would not have seemed manly to wear glasses and that being nearsided might have kept them out of the army at first .   I did also find a phot of Stanton with glasses .  But he was not a soldier. 

 

I agree Fuller Zollicofer could  have used a pair of good glasses that fatal day.  Would have saved his life . 



 Posted: Thu Mar 15th, 2007 08:07 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
6th Post
JoanieReb
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jan 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 620
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

A field portrait of a soldier in glasses would be even more difficult to find due to the nature of wet-plate photography, which was how photos were taken at the time. 

Exposure time for pictures was usually between 10-14 seconds, so subjects were very carefully posed, then had to maintain the pose without motion for the full exposure time.  If you look carefully at pictures of soldiers whom appear to be in motion, you will see that they are posed so as to appear to be in motion, and are holding the pose.  If the pose wasn't held, the photographer ended up with something like Alexander Gardner's famous "two-headed dog" in plate 5 of "Gardner's Phototgrapic Sketchbook of the Civil War". 

So, soldiers would have removed their glasses either from vanity, or because lighting was so all-important that they would have been asked to remove their glasses out-of-doors, so as not to reflect the sun's rays and cause a hot-spot in the picture.



 Posted: Thu Mar 15th, 2007 08:09 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
7th Post
JoanieReb
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jan 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 620
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

A field portrait of a soldier in glasses would be even more difficult to find due to the nature of wet-plate photography, which was how photos were taken at the time. 

Exposure time for pictures was usually between 10-14 seconds, so subjects were very carefully posed, then had to maintain the pose without motion for the full exposure time.  If you look carefully at pictures of soldiers whom appear to be in motion, you will see that they are posed so as to appear to be in motion, and are holding the pose.  If the pose wasn't held, the photographer ended up with something like Alexander Gardner's famous "two-headed dog" in plate 5 of "Gardner's Phototgrapic Sketchbook of the Civil War". 

So, soldiers would have removed their glasses either from vanity, or because lighting was so all-important that they would have been asked to remove their glasses out-of-doors, so as not to reflect the sun's rays and cause a hot-spot in the picture.



 Posted: Thu Mar 15th, 2007 08:22 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
8th Post
susansweet
Member


Joined: Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 1420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Joanie that makes a lot of sense.  I was thinking that when I was looking at all the photos of groups of  soldiers .  I thought they must have had glasses, at least one or two of them . Maybe they are like friends of mine that always take their glasses off to have pictures taken   I have even had photographers asked me to take my glasses off because of a glare.   

You have hit on the solution Iwould bet.



You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Thu Mar 15th, 2007 09:19 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
10th Post
JoanieReb
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jan 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 620
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I have found a painting, by Dale Gallon, of the 24th Michigan in battle in which one soldier is clearly wearing glasses.  I'll see if I can find an online link to it....

Mr. JDC, I do realize you said in camp, not battle, but so far, this is the best that I can do. 

Joanie

Last edited on Thu Mar 15th, 2007 09:23 pm by JoanieReb



 Posted: Thu Mar 15th, 2007 11:58 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
11th Post
JoanieReb
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jan 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 620
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Mr. JDC,

I have found a group photograph of 10 officers of The USS Monitor, photographed in July 1862  by James Wilson (a member of The Matthew Brady Bunch), on the deck of The Monitor.  The officer in the center is clearly wearing glasses.  Before I go looking for an on-line version, does this fit your criteria?

For any interested party, the photo is on page 72-73 of Chet Hearn's The Civil War - Virginia.  It can't be scanned because it runs across the spine of the book through 2 pages.

Joanie



 Posted: Fri Mar 16th, 2007 02:43 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
12th Post
medicboymatt
Member


Joined: Fri Feb 23rd, 2007
Location: Out In The Swamps
Posts: 36
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

As I recall, Miss Joanie, that photo of the Monitor's officers on deck is a standard, it should be available in other sources, so if it isn't already scanned into JPEG somewhere online, it could be easily done without the "run-off" of your version.



You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Fri Mar 16th, 2007 05:32 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
14th Post
susansweet
Member


Joined: Sun Sep 4th, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 1420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Joanie I found the photo in my William Davis Bell Wiley book . That guy has glasses for sure .  They are also refleciting the light !!!   I passed right over tha picture the other night.  Good job.

Susan



 Posted: Fri Mar 16th, 2007 12:02 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
15th Post
calcav
Member
 

Joined: Sat Jan 28th, 2006
Location: Corinth, MS
Posts: 160
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

In that photo of the officers on the Monitor it appears there are two possibly three men wearing glasses. That shoots the old one in a million theory in the foot.

The seated officer on the left is William Keeler, the paymaster. If there is one guy on the ship I WANT wearing glasses, it's the guy working on my pay records. Here is another photo of the bespectacled swabbie.

.org/monitor/07_life/image_page/keeler.html

Tom



 Posted: Fri Mar 16th, 2007 02:47 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
16th Post
David White
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 909
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Aren't there more than one photo where Matthew Brady did the Hitchcock thing and put himself in the scene and isn't he wearing his glasses in those, I think that is the case?

Also what's the deal with Union staff and general photos from the field, putting small black children on the ground at their feet, you see that in many of those types of photos? 



 Current time is 02:48 pm
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.4589 seconds (10% database + 90% PHP). 30 queries executed.