17th century photography, or wishful thinking?

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,474
Reactions
18,344
Ran into this interesting military uniforms book. It has a lot of images in there. They are mostly paintings pertaining to different years. I think it starts at approximately 1625 or so. Well, some of those images look way too good to be paintings. If I were to see some of those images detached from this book, I would say that they were photographs. Below are a few examples to pick your interest.

What's interesting, it would have a year listed, like 1701 for example. And than it would have a name of a person depicted

The Vinkhuijzen collection of military uniforms - you will have to click through.

What do you think?

photo_1650.jpgphoto_1650_1.jpgphoto_1696.jpgphoto_1696_1.jpgphoto_1696_2.jpgphoto_1696_3.jpgphoto_1701.jpgphoto_1701_1.jpgphoto_1720.jpgphoto_1745.jpgphoto_1750.jpgphoto_1750_1.jpgphoto_1756.jpg
 

Onijunbei

Well-known member
Messages
208
Reactions
653
Im confused... What year is the book.. And can I wear a uniform that was worn a hundred years ago and have someone take a photograph depicting what the uniform looked like a 100 years ago.. In other words is it possible that even though they include a name it could be someone posing as that person wearing the uniform they would have been wearing during that time period because they dont have a painting of that person....
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
652
Reactions
1,363
They definitely look posed for. Some look like they could be painted, others look very much photographic.
There was some rudimentary photography in the early 1800s officially, but it was almost a century before the tech was sufficiently developed (pun intended).
 

The Wack

Active member
Messages
64
Reactions
208
My thought on the second look at the pics was that it was as if someone was running around snapping pics of a civil-war-re-enactment type thing, obviously a European version.

So in general agreement with other members above... possibly a mix of photo and painting on a couple, likely re-enactment/staged photo in others....?
 

humanoidlord

Well-known member
Messages
648
Reactions
725
@wizz33 hit it right at the head, those are pictures showing what the uniforms at those times looked like, not pictures from them
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,474
Reactions
18,344
It appears there was a collection but some images got lost, and they had to replace those.

This set could be a good uniform id tool though.
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,570
Reactions
5,207
My thought on the second look at the pics was that it was as if someone was running around snapping pics of a civil-war-re-enactment type thing, obviously a European version.

So in general agreement with other members above... possibly a mix of photo and painting on a couple, likely re-enactment/staged photo in others....?
That was my thought as well. They even look like they're on photographic paper, curled and yellowed at the edges. Most of them are probably photos but from staged poses of the era.
 

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
503
Reactions
1,622
Photos are likely to have imperfections, scratches, noise etc from the negs. Would really need to see the originals to comment further.
 

Top