Who says professional photographers couldn't capture a story in the 1930's? A friend brought me a picture that she purchased at a garage sale. She said the family had all passed away...

Shooter41 Loc: Wichita, KS

A friend brought me a picture that she purchased at a garage sale. She said the family had all passed away and their family albums were being sold for almost nothing in a garage sale. The moment I saw the image of the mother interacting with her baby from the 1930's, I felt their love. Hope you enjoy looking at it and taking a moment to appreciate family life and the photographers in America almost a hundred years ago and the work they did recording it. Shooter41

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

Thank you for a beautiful image that not only speaks to this family but to many of the rest of us. We are able to enjoy it because a print of it was made some ninety plus years ago. What do you suppose the odds are of us being able to see nine decades from now a similar image digitally made today and committed to digital storage?

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

RodeoMan wrote:

... What do you suppose the odds are of us being able to see nine decades from now a similar image digitally made today and committed to digital storage?

I'd guess the odd are low because the number of images produced in the 1930s will be infinitesimal compared to the number of digital images produced in the 2030s (and even smaller in another 100 years). It's just too many images to sort through. The images may (or may not) last, but the time required to find one image will go WAY up.

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

It's a nice enough image, and anyone can read into it the love that would obviously have existed in the mother's regard for her kid, but whoever 'directed' the shot (if indeed it had been 'directed' (as presumably any studio photographer of that --or any-- time more likely would've directed [unlike --or as opposed to--] the proud father/camera wielding person who failed to wait for "the moment" when the mom did more than merely smile in the same space that the child had smiled) apparently chose --unfortunately-- otherwise. (In terms of mother/child 'portrature', the mom's straight profiled smile would likely have been more 'telling'/emotive/etc., than anything otherwise, and even a 3:4 facial projection could potentially have been more 'classic' (with the baby held slightly more forward), but the 13/15ths angle as shot defies both logic and love.

There's absolutely no doubt that the image would've been cherished by any or all involved. But in terms of being a really good image, it could've been better.

Whether shot on film or via digital doesn't ultimately matter, does it?

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

Cany143 wrote:

It's a nice enough image, and anyone can read into... (show quote)

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

And I don't remember seeing/reading anywhere that photographers a hundred (or whatever) years ago couldn't capture an image/story.

jcboy3

Shooter41 wrote:

A friend brought me a picture that she purchased at a garage sale. She said the family had all passed away and their family albums were being sold for almost nothing in a garage sale. The moment I saw the image of the mother interacting with her baby from the 1930's, I felt their love. Hope you enjoy looking at it and taking a moment to appreciate family life and the photographers in America almost a hundred years ago and the work they did recording it. Shooter41

I give up...who says it?

Shooter41 Loc: Wichita, KS

Dear RodeoMan...The odds are probably somewhere between zero and negative .0003%

Shooter41 Loc: Wichita, KS

jcboy3 wrote:

I give up...who says it?

Dear jcboy3...NOBODY! (That's the point.) Shooter41

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

Shooter41 wrote:

Dear RodeoMan...The odds are probably somewhere between zero and negative .0003%

If this image were from a commercial studio, could you share the name with us? It isn't just the inane and mundane images that are being lost to the future, but also ones that can play an important role in helping illustrate this age we are in. And even an image that could be considered run of the mill today, could prove to be a valuable resource in the future.

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

DirtFarmer wrote:

I'd guess the odd are low because the number of images produced in the 1930s will be infinitesimal compared to the number of digital images produced in the 2030s (and even smaller in another 100 years). It's just too many images to sort through. The images may (or may not) last, but the time required to find one image will go WAY up.

There are, to be sure, infinitely more images being made today than in the 1930s, but I believe most of these images will remain in some form of digital storage and will never be printed. Sure some of these digital images will be able to be found, just as a needle in a haystack can be found, if only we can find the right haystack, a hundred years from now. I often have said that I would trust the shoebox and photo album to carry images into the future than I would the rapidly evolving digital environment where images are less of a keepsake and more of temporary thing to be noticed and forgotten and certainly not preserved.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Images, negatives, print and digital spanning 3+ generations will die with me. There is not another generation to pass them to. The hard copies will be discarded along with other things which only had meaning to me. Digital images along with other personal things will be deleted before the computer is disposed of.

gwilliams6

Shooter41 wrote:

A friend brought me a picture that she purchased at a garage sale. She said the family had all passed away and their family albums were being sold for almost nothing in a garage sale. The moment I saw the image of the mother interacting with her baby from the 1930's, I felt their love. Hope you enjoy looking at it and taking a moment to appreciate family life and the photographers in America almost a hundred years ago and the work they did recording it. Shooter41

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Iron Sight Loc: Utah

Wonder how long digitally stored images can be reliably be stored?