Smiles - Photos

[kerikiwi]

It can be hard to tell if an old posed photo was done by a professional or someone who had a camera.

And exactly how did the professionals take photos without cameras?

 

[Monketi Ghost]

I'm surprised nobody has asked if it's really the case.

How many photos out of all those years have you seen?

What's "rarely"?

What kind of photos, news or personally posed shots?

 

[arthwollipot]

 

[rjh01]

Arthwollipot's picture above is typical of the photo I have seen.

I'm surprised nobody has asked if it's really the case.

How many photos out of all those years have you seen?

What's "rarely"?

What kind of photos, news or personally posed shots?

I have seen heaps of photos. I have seen them at exhibitions of various kinds.

Rarely means there might be an exception to the rule but I have not seen it.

 

[blutoski]

I'm surprised nobody has asked if it's really the case.

That was actually the theme of my post above (?)

I would like to distinguish between what people actually did while posing vs what we can glean only from what are obviously selected photos available today.

Like many people, I have crates of photos from my grandparents' estates that start in the late 19th century (grandma was born in 1890) and I don't really observe a pattern like that.

My great-grandparents smiled for the camera in casual portraits; they may or may not have been smiling in candid genre shots; they looked downright grim for formal portraits.

Same as today.

 

[fuelair]

I'm surprised nobody has asked if it's really the case.

How many photos out of all those years have you seen?

What's "rarely"?

What kind of photos, news or personally posed shots?

Literally tens of thousands of which (only an estimate for hopefully obvious reasons) ca. 20 % were for historical reasons out of areas of specific interest, 50-60 % were areas of interest items and the rest were subject areas (that might run in either of the other two groups to some extent. People were present in well over half. Obviously posed in 30-40 %. No idea how many were "news" but a lot (if I see a photo in a book of photographs/monograph on a specific photographer that was originally run in a newspaper to show an event, is it a news photo- for my purposes - especially if I am using it to demonstrate how a good photographer can compose on the fly). As to personally posed, not many but some. A lot of "on the fly" though - mostly people, a number of birds, irritated half-blind alligator, the usual stuff.

 

[triforcharity]

I think it has to do with 1958 -- the year cheese was invented.

Nominated!! Thanks for the laugh!!

 

[gumboot]

I think the various posters here have covered all of the most probable explanations. Here's a summary:

1. As a rule, the more formal a photograph is, the less likely the subject will smile
2. Historically, photography took the place of formal painting which was a serious and expensive business
3. Over time as photography became more common, candid and informal photography became more common
4. Because formal portraiture is more highly valued it is more likely to be preserved over time

These points lead ultimately to a false reading that there's some sort of cultural shift in regards to smiling.

And for the record I have seen many, many pre 1960s photographs in which people were smiling, and I've seen (and taken) many post-1960s photographs in which people were quite serious.

 

[rjh01]

I think gumboot's post is a good summary of reality.

 

[arthwollipot]

Those were my great-grandparents, by the way. I haven't had the picture reliably dated.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Look at My avatar.

I'm smiling on the inside.