Thanks krispix. There is no metal just glass plates. I am thinking this is an ambrotype as both his face and hands are skin color and a little rouge has been added to his face. More post production enhancement as you said.

A slightly more basic answer:
Adjusting the ISO makes your sensor either more or less sensitive to light (the medium with which we photograph). Lower ISO is less sensitive, requiring more light to photograph, higher ISO is more sensitive, requiring less light to photograph.
F-stop (aperture) describes the size of the "hole" in the lens letting the light go through. A smaller "hole" allows less light in a given time period, a larger "hole" allows more light.
A small f-stop is designated by a larger number (f-11, f-22) a large f-stop is designated by a smaller number (f-4, f-2.8).
Your choice of a large or small aperture (f-stop) will impact your photographic result in different ways: Depth-of-field, the near to far limit of area in sharp focus, as mentioned in a previous answer. There are other differences as well. Pretty cool, huh?

Here is more information for you http://www.historiccamera.com/cgi-bin/librarium/pm.cgi?action=display&login=no1afoldpocketd

The No. 1A Folding Pocket Kodak (FPK), Model D was manufactured by the Eastman Kodak Company from 1909 to 1915. This camera is also referred to as the No. 1A Folding Pocket Kodak, R.R. Type. Fitted with the very best rapid rectilinear lens, double combination, that was available along with the new Kodak Ball bearing type shutter featuring a cable and finger release. This camera was capable of taking 12 exposures, 2 1/2 x 4 1/4 sized, on No. 116 roll film. Compact folding, measuring 8 x 2 x 3 3 /4 inches and weighing 26 ounces. Originally priced at $12.00.

binkinkawboy: We are surely dating ourselves! I used to use my aunt's Brownie camera, also fascinated with the red window and the blinding flash that the unit emitted (she only used Sylvania bulbs and Eveready batteries). I ALSO succumbed to the Polaroid Swinger and we (you and I) paid $19.95 for it. Yes, the resulting images were equivalent to the pictures one used to see in the old National Enquirer. Cameras? First, the Kodak Starflash, then the Kodak thing that utilized a cartridge that you popped into the back. And the first 35mm I had was a Canon, one of their earlier point and shoots that took excellent pictures. I am now the proud father of a Canon T1i, a Fuji 602J and my first digital camera, the Olympus 3000 that still kicks butt also. Thanks for stoking my aging memory file...the cameras and pictures that they've taken bring back very fond recollections, especially of family and friends who are no longer with me.

The Brownie that I started off with was one of those big old brown bakeolite bodied jobs. From the replies, it would seem that while yes, Kodak produced a lot of inexpensive cameras that produced photos of limited quality, they did get many, many people started in the photography hobby. No doubt they also allowed many ordinary folks to afford a camera they could use to take snapshots of family. And of the latter, no doubt many of those photos leave a lot to be desired in artistic value, they are no doubt priceless to the people they belong to. It's a shame Kodak's reputation and industry standing has eroded so much lately.