Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Do we have any info on his height etc? They all seems so small!
    In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice!

    Comment


    • #32
      miles of smiles

      Originally posted by Robert View Post
      I suppose with those old cameras, it was a bit difficult to hold a smile for the required length of time.

      It seems to have been a spring wedding - plenty of blossom.
      If I remember correctly any movement would blur the photograph. I know when I and my wife had a glass plate photo done a few years back that it required five-10 minutes. And again, being a formal photograph I don't know that smiling was encouraged by the photographer.
      Neil "Those who forget History are doomed to repeat it." - Santayana

      Comment


      • #33
        Height

        Originally posted by KatBradshaw View Post
        Do we have any info on his height etc? They all seems so small!
        Average height back then for men was approximately 5 feet eight inches.
        Neil "Those who forget History are doomed to repeat it." - Santayana

        Comment


        • #34
          I don't think people smiled on pictures ever. and it was not only due the fact that they had to stand still for 10 minutes or so, but also because back then a picture was a serious portrait, like an official representation of the persons, far from the happy little memories pictures we take on our trips around the world to show how happy we are nowadays

          Comment


          • #35
            The only known man to have seen the Ripper (well, IMO ). And only, what, eleven (?) years after the sighting itself? Wow.

            Comment


            • #36
              Photos

              Originally posted by Sister Hyde View Post
              I don't think people smiled on pictures ever. and it was not only due the fact that they had to stand still for 10 minutes or so, but also because back then a picture was a serious portrait, like an official representation of the persons, far from the happy little memories pictures we take on our trips around the world to show how happy we are nowadays
              Not only that which you are correct about but also look at the state of dental hygine inthe 1880s. It cost money for the photos adn as inthe the Lawende photo was primarily used as Sister , you point out, for formal occassions such as weddings and yes, funerals. Photos of the dearly departed were quite the rage in the Victorian era and I have seen a few. While we would consider it morbid, it was seen as a loving tribute back then.
              Neil "Those who forget History are doomed to repeat it." - Santayana

              Comment


              • #37
                Just thinking that there were two others with Lawende, and coincidentally, there are 3 men in the picture.

                Mike
                huh?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Yes just like people used to keep the corpses at home untill the funerals, which is today almost not allowed I think, or just like open-casket funerals, today we find it very morbid, but it used to be the standard. Yes I'm wondering how the people would have looked if they were smiling and showing their teeth back then, what an official portrait that would have been!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by YankeeSergeant View Post
                    If I remember correctly any movement would blur the photograph. I know when I and my wife had a glass plate photo done a few years back that it required five-10 minutes. And again, being a formal photograph I don't know that smiling was encouraged by the photographer.
                    I recently read that smiling for photographs was a later trend. Most early photos do not show individuals grinning like cheshire cats. Probably due to the length of time it took to take a pic, having to remain completely still, and the cost of having to take another photograph.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Chris View Post
                      Earlier this year I was delighted to receive from a descendant of Joseph Lawende a copy of a group photograph taken at the wedding of his daughter Rose to Isidore Goodman Samuel in 1899. Joseph can be seen on the right at the back, standing next to his wife Annie. The bridesmaid sitting in the centre at the front is Joseph's youngest daughter Ruby. I am most grateful to the owner of the photograph for permission to reproduce it here.

                      [ATTACH]9967[/ATTACH]

                      Click image for larger version

Name:	LAWENDE WEDDING PIC.jpg
Views:	211
Size:	146.1 KB
ID:	799917


                      I was ridiculed for saying that it was generally obvious in Whitechapel in 1888 who was Jewish and who was not.

                      That wedding photograph illustrates my point.

                      It would have been obvious to both Schwarz and Lawende whether the man they were describing was a gentile or a Jew.

                      It is therefore inconceivable that either of them would suddenly have realised that their suspect was a Jew upon seeing him in the Seaside Home.
                      Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 11-10-2022, 10:08 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        How does Lawende look ‘Jewish’ in that photograph. He looks like an English gentleman to me.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes

                        “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


                          Click image for larger version

Name:	LAWENDE WEDDING PIC.jpg
Views:	211
Size:	146.1 KB
ID:	799917


                          I was ridiculed for saying that it was generally obvious in Whitechapel in 1888 who was Jewish and who was not.

                          That wedding photograph illustrates my point.

                          It would have been obvious to both Schwarz and Lawende whether the man they were describing was a gentile or a Jew.

                          It is therefore inconceivable that either of them would suddenly have realised that their suspect was a Jew upon seeing him in the Seaside Home.
                          omg. what are you talking about?
                          "Is all that we see or seem
                          but a dream within a dream?"

                          -Edgar Allan Poe


                          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                          -Frederick G. Abberline

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                            omg. what are you talking about?

                            Are you referring to my last sentence?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


                              Are you referring to my last sentence?
                              you know exactly what im talking about but ill spell it out for you. why do you think the people in that photo look jewish?
                              "Is all that we see or seem
                              but a dream within a dream?"

                              -Edgar Allan Poe


                              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                              -Frederick G. Abberline

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                                you know exactly what im talking about but ill spell it out for you. why do you think the people in that photo look jewish?

                                My point is that they would have been easily identifiable as Jewish in Whitechapel in 1888.

                                If you don't believe me, then I suggest you take a look at a photograph taken at a gentile wedding in Whitechapel at that time and compare the two.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X