Regular readers of this blog know that I collect the early photographs known as daguerreotypes. You can read all about my daguerreotypes in my sidebar or here.
The eyes were obviously tinted blue, but the color has either faded, or was always too subtle, and so the eyes appear much lighter than normal. That gives the face a rather eerie look, I think.
The eyes get more interesting as they're enlarged because the irises are square, rather than round. My thinking is that the retoucher didn't make a circular motion with his brush, but instead made two vertical strokes and one horizontal stroke, thereby boxing the irises. Can my imaginative readers think of another scenario for this other-worldly face?
.
Hello Mark:
ReplyDeleteWe just have one small daguerreotype and, like yours, we feel it to have an out-of-world quality to it. Perhaps it is the nature of the process itself which seems to give the subject an 'ethereal' atmosphere. Whatever, they are most intriguing examples of the early art of photography and this one is a particularly fine one. The tinting does indeed add an extra eerie dimension, especially to the eyes. But, it is the plaid waistcoat which we admire particularly -such a dandy!
Dear Jane and Lance - Collecting daguerreotypes gives one great insights to the everyday life of the past, including things as simple as hairdos and clothing. That vest was a factor in my wanting to buy this particular image, and the funny thing is that I have one similar to it in my closet.
DeleteDear Mark - the daguerrotype case is really lovely, but the man looks a bit like a wax work to me.
ReplyDeleteMay be the square pupils were done by an early Victorian joker.
The nearest pupils to square that I know of are those of the goat. The oblong pupils of goats allows the animals to see at a 330 degree angle, as opposed to humans who generally see at around a 185 degree angle.
Dear Rosemary,
DeleteI've always wondered why goats have such strange eyes, and now I know. Perhaps they need to see 330 degrees to walk along those tiny mountain ledges.
Dear Mark, Could it be the reflection of the camera box in his eyes?
ReplyDeleteDear Gina,
DeleteI think your answer is a possibility. The camera would have had to have been very large (which was sometimes the case) and the rest of the room would have needed to be completely flooded in light, which is less likely, considering the dark background. What I also find interesting is that dark, high-contrast rim around the eyes. Very unnatural, I think.
Hello Mark, Another prize daguerreotype. The surface looks immaculate and the subject is well posed. The tinting is also well-handled; sometimes, especially with later tintypes, it can be very slap dash.
ReplyDeleteI think that your explanation of the square pupils is likely. After all, the eyes are probably only a couple of millimeters across, and it would have been difficult to paint the irises with a circular motion. Perhaps with a good loupe you can tell if the square is in the surface color or deeper in the silver.
--Road to Parnassus
Hello, Jim,
DeleteAt your suggestion, I looked at the daguerreotype through a loop, but I don't see any variation in the surface. What shoots a hole in my own explanation is that I am supposing that the retoucher's work on the eye somehow opaqued the iris, yet if you look at the cheeks, the pink tint is a wash that doesn't at all obscure very subtle shadows.
I guess a question I could ask my readers would be, have you ever known a person with eyes as light as this man's?
ReplyDeleteYes, the eyes are alarming! Love his plaid vest though. My late grandmother who passed away at 92 had eyes that were startling light blue -similar to this photo, surrounded by pure white. She barely needed glasses her entire life I might add. At her funeral, people who hadn't seen her in years all remarked separately on her eyes. What is it that we put so much store by them?
ReplyDeleteHi, Stefan,
DeleteI really enjoyed getting your comment, and knowing eyes can actually be this light.
I had a friend in college who had one eye that was brown and one eye that was perfectly split between blue and brown. People wouldn't notice right away, but when they did, they'd blurt out that he had one eye that was two colors — as though he hadn't yet discovered it for himself!
Dear Mark,
ReplyDeleteWhat an intriguing image-- I love daguerreotypes, too. They have such an interesting, physical quality,much more than modern photos. Perhaps modern photography as a process is perceived as being more 'invisible' than the older processes. This is a beautiful piece-- I can see why you bought it. I think the sitter is wonderful--so elegant in his plaid waistcoat! His eyes are a mystery to me, though. Perhaps they were very light, as has been suggested, and later retouched to define the pupils... In any case, a treasure, to be sure!
Warm regards,
Erika
Dear Erika - As I wander through a variety of art blogs, I see that there are some current photographers experiemnting with the Daguerre process, and what I see is that even contemporary daguerreotypes have a uniquely mystical quality.
DeleteNo idea what "caused" the square pupils but it certainly is a beguiling image.
ReplyDeleteI notice photos of World War 1 soldiers also have an other worldly quality
My collecting has not included WWI, though I am intrigued by group photos of classes and organizations, and by extension, antique photos of military units. I guess it's sort of like people-watching . . .
DeleteWow! I want, I want!
ReplyDeleteHello, Kevin! I would have guessed that you enjoy the etherial quality of daguereotypes!
Delete