Skip to content

Double Take

09/23/2014

During my nearly eight years at the VHS, I’ve had many instances where I’ve needed to stop and do a double take.

 

We need you to photograph a small pox scab.

Wait. What?

 

Those bears are on leashes.

Wait. What is going on there?

 

J. E. B. Stuart signed his pants.

Wait. Really? [not really, but someone signed them for him]

 

When I digitized a set of daguerreotypes this summer I made that familiar pause again.

Wait. Didn’t I just see this image?

 

It turns out that the two daguerreotypes of Lucy Goode Tucker Chambers that I was holding were mirror images of one another. It took me a while to determine what was going on. I compared the ribbon on her bonnet, the swag of her watch chain, and even the book on which she rests her elbow. Did she just shift her weight to the other side, or was it the same image in reverse?

I confirmed it by digitally flipping and overlaying one image on top of the other. After a slight resizing, it was a perfect match. What a unique find!

Lucy Goode Tucker Chambers

When the copy image is reversed and made translucent, it can be easily matched to the original to confirm that it is a copy, not a second original capture.

Daguerreotypes are the earliest form of permanent photographic imagery. They are made by capturing an image on a polished silver-coated, light-sensitive copper plate, which is developed with mercury vapor and fixed with a salt solution. Because the finished plate is viewed from the side that was closest to the subject, when the daguerreotype is created, the image is laterally reversed—a mirror image. The use of a reflective prism could produce a right-reading image, but that was rarely done primarily because the resulting light loss would require already-long exposure times to be even longer. To get a right-reading image, the easiest solution was to make a daguerreotype of the daguerreotype. The resulting copy would read correctly.

White frame house with white picket fence at Cambridge, New York, with horse and buggy in front

White frame house with white picket fence at Cambridge, New York, with horse and buggy in front. This daguerreotype has a mirror included in its case to make it convenient to view the image in the correct orientation. (Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, DAG no. 1324)

The Library of Congress has an interesting daguerreotype in their collection that shows a house with a picket fence. A landscape view like this is something that would be important to view in the correct orientation, not mirrored. To solve this problem, a mirror was included in the daguerreotype case so that the viewer could look at the photo of the house through the mirror and see a correctly oriented house and street scene. Ahhh, home feels like home again.

Each daguerreotype is a one-of-a-kind photograph. Because there is no negative, there is no way to produce a subsequent print.

With this set of portraits of Chambers we are left wondering if we have two images because 1) someone wanted a right-reading image or 2) someone wanted a second copy. We’ll never know for sure, but we can enjoy this example of early photography either way.

To learn more about the process of making a daguerreotype, check out this excellent video from The J. Paul Getty Museum:

Meg M. Eastman is the Digital Collections Manager at the Virginia Historical Society.

Advertisements
3 Comments leave one →
  1. 09/23/2014 9:17 am

    You certainly get to photograph some unique items! Thanks for showing us some of what goes on behind the scenes .

    Like

  2. 09/23/2014 3:09 pm

    Reblogged this on Blue Ridge Vintage and commented:
    Because I’ve again been slacking on this whole blogging thing, I’m reposting Meg Eastman’s post on daguerrotypes and collection digitization. Meg is the Digital Collections Manager at the Virginia Historical Society.

    I have exciting news for this upcoming Thursday, so be sure to check Blue Ridge Vintage then!

    Like

  3. 09/23/2014 9:52 pm

    Just took a MOOC The cameras never lies about the minulipation of photographs since the dawn of wet plate photography. I figured that daguerreotype s were “safe”==not cutting and pasting. Well, now think again. I guess if it can be done, it has!pppapat

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: