Wednesday 9 April 2014

Sepia Saturday 223: The Finest Equipped Photographic Gallery in the Vicinity


Sepia Saturday by Alan Burnett and Marilyn Brindley

This week's Sepia Saturday image prompt is all about buildings and town scenes. I'll be taking a closer look at some tintypes from my own family's collection, and an emerging story about a photographic studio in Chicago, Illinois. The building itself will only appear later in the article, so please bear with me.

Image © and collection of Brett PayneImage © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Charles Leslie Lionel Payne (1892-1975), taken c. October-November 1892
Sixth plate tintypes (63 x 88mm, 65 x 90mm), unidentified photographer
Probably by H.R. Koopman, 11104 Michigan Ave, Roseland, Chicago
Images © and collection of Brett Payne & Barbara Ellison

Among the family photographs that my aunt and I have inherited are a series of four sixth-plate tintypes. The term "sixth-plate" refers to the size of the photograph, produced by cutting a full plate (8½" x 6½" or 216 x 165mm) into six, each measuring roughly (2¾" x 3¼" or 70 x 83mm). As with many such tintypes, the edges are roughly cut and the corners have been trimmed to make them easier to slip into photo album slots.

Image © and collection of Brett Payne Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Detail of two six-plate tintype portraits of Leslie Payne

As is also commonly found with this format, they have no photographer's details or other distinuishing marks, but I can be fairly certain that the two almost identical portraits of my grandfather Charles Leslie Lionel Payne were taken in Chicago. He was born there in April 1892 and returned to England with his parents in mid- to late November that year, so would have been six or seven moths old at the time he parents took him to the studio. The two images appear at first glance to be of the same view. A detailed examination of the child in the pram reveals identical poses which I think we have to assume would be impossible to duplicate for two separate exposures.

Image © and collection of Brett Payne Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Detail of two six-plate tintype portraits of Leslie Payne

Sharp-eyed readers will however have noticed subtle differences, which are more obvious in these two views of the pram's undercarriage. There is a considerable shift in the position of the rear axle in relation to the rim of the front wheel in the two images. How can this be if the two photographs were taken in the same split second, as evidenced by the child's pose? Well, the answer lies in a question of parallax, defined in the COD as the "apparent displacement of an object, caused by actual change of point of observation." This Wikipedia article has an animation which shows the effect very well.

Image © and courtesy of Rob Niederman
9-tube "Gem" wet-plate camera, by unknown U.S. maker
Image © and courtesy of Rob Niederman

In other words, the two portraits were indeed taken at the same instant, but from two slightly different positions. This was achievable with a multi-lens camera, such as the one shown above. Camera collector and very knowledgeable historian Rob Niederman points out that the noticeable vertical parallax, along with no perceptible horizontal parallax, suggests the second image was probably directly above the first on the original plate. The camera must have had at least a four lens set (1/9-tubes, using a 4¼" x 5¼" plate) or conceivably 9, 12 or 16 lens sets. He adds, "In summary, studio outfits were very adaptable in what you could do with them."

Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Charles Hallam Payne (1870-1960), taken c. 1892
Sixth plate tintype (62 x 86mm), unidentified photographer
Probably by H.R. Koopman, 11104 Michigan Ave, Roseland, Chicago
Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison

The third tintype is a three-quarter length standing portrait of Leslie's Uncle Hallam - Charles Hallam Payne (1870-1960) - who was with Leslie and his parents in Chicago in 1891 and 1892.

Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Unidentified subject, taken c. 1892
Sixth plate tintype (66 x 88mm), unidentified photographer
Probably by H.R. Koopman, 11104 Michigan Ave, Roseland, Chicago
Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison

In the fourth portrait, an unidentified young man, smartly dressed and with a moustache, is seated in a studio with a painted backdrop.

Image © and collection of Brett Payne Image © and courtesy of Barbara Ellison
Detail of backdrops in two six-plate tintype portraits

Examination of the painted backdrop (above left) shows similarities with that used in the two portraits of Leslie Payne. I have some reservations, but the similarity of the branches and knots in the tree trunks has more or less convinced me that they are the same backdrop, although perhaps touched up a little between the two sittings.

It seems likely therefore, given the similarity of features and their provenance, that all four tintype portraits were taken in the same studio. But who was the man with a moustache?


Pullman Car Works, Roseland, Chicago, c.1890
Photograph by H.R. Koopman

Leslie's parents Charles Vincent and Amy Payne had travelled to Chicago, Illinois from their home in Derbyshire, England in May-June 1891, very soon after their wedding. Accompanying them was Vincent's younger brother Frank Payne, and together they would join another brother Charles Hallam Payne, who had gone to Chicago to look for work a year earlier. Uncle Hallam had been working as a carpenter at the Pullman Car Works.

The moustachioed man is obviously not Charles Hallam and, by comparison with many other photographs in my collection, is not my grandfather Charles Vincent. I thought at first that it might be Frank (unfortunately we have no other photographs in the family collection with which to compare it), but Frank would have been only 18 years old at the time, so I think that is very unlikely. Perhaps he was a friend.


Pullman Car Works, Roseland, Chicago, c.1890
Photograph by H.R. Koopman

In a letter written to him on 12 January 1891 his father Henry Payne thanked Hallam for a ...
"... book of Pulman [sic]. I am glad to hear that Pulman does not go in for many hotels. Perhaps you will make a note of that."
This book, currently in the collection of my aunt, includes a number of photographs of Pulman's works and the town he built to house his workers, including the two shown above, all taken by photographer H.R. Koopman.

Image © and collection of Brett Payne
Employee's Pass for The World's Columbian Exposition, 1 June 1892

Image © and collection of Brett Payne
United Carpenter's Council Quarterly Working Card, Oct-Dec 1892

Some time after the arrival of his brothers all three found employment at the Chicago World's Fair, officially known as The World's Columbian Exposition. However, it appears that they were still living in Roseland - Lesley Payne's birth certificate shows that he was born at 10810 Curtis Ave, Roseland, Chicago on 9 April 1892.

Image © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital ArchivesImage © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives
Koopman Advertising Flyer, 1 May 1888, Printed paper (150 x 220mm)
Portrait of H.R. Koopman, c. 1894, Oval silver gelatin print (70 x 133mm) on grey-coloured card mount (108 x 212mm)
Images © Pullman State Historic Site, courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives

Henry Ralph Koopman (1865-1944) operated photographic studio in Roseland, a suburb of Chicago, from 1884 until the early 1900s, offering a wide variety of formats at what he boasted was the "finest equipped photograph gallery in the vicinity."

Image © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives
Koopman's Photograph Gallery, Cor. 111th St and Michigan Av., 1886
Silver gelatin print (239 x 182mm) mounted on card
Image © Pullman State Historic Site, courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives

This image of Koopman's Photograph Gallery at 11106 South Michigan Avenue, on the corner with 111th Street, was taken in 1886. The large windows and skylight on the side of the building indicate the position of the studio towards the rear. By the time the Paynes arrived in Roseland in 1892, where they lived only three blocks away from the gallery, Koopman had built himself a much grander three-story building with a studio on the third floor, although I've not managed to find a corresponding external view.

Image © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives Image © and courtesy of The Cabinet Card Gallery
Portraits of unidentified woman and children, c. late 1880s
Cabinet portraits taken by H.R. Koopman, Roseland, Illinois
Images © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives, © and courtesy of The Cabinet Card Gallery

The cabinet portraits above were taken in the late 1880s to early 1890s in Koopman's studio, and demonstrate that he used a very similar style of painted backdrop to those seen in the tintypes, although I have been unable to match the specific backdrop used in the latter with any marked Koopman portraits.

Image © Pullman State Historic Site & courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives
HR Koopman photographing his daughter, Marie, in his studio, c. 1895
Silver gelatin print (353 x 279mm)
Image © Pullman State Historic Site, courtesy of Illinois Digital Archives

This wonderfully evocative print from Koopman's archives preserved at the Pullman State Historic Site shows the photographer himself at work in the studio, capturing a portrait of his daughter Marie around 1895. He is composing the image on a ground glass screen at the back of a large format glass-plate studio camera, his head under a black cloth to exclude light. The lighting available from the large window and skylight can be moderated and diffused by the drapes hanging from the ceiling. A painted canvas backdrop is in place behind the seated girl, and a second rolled backdrop can be seen hanging above. There are a number of different items of standard studio furniture, including padded stool, side tables, cane chair, ornate screen, carpets and curtains, as well as a small stove to keep the studio warm and the clients comfortable.


Charles Vincent Payne, August 1891
Cabinet card by Harrison & Coover, Central Music Hall,
cnr. State & Randolph Streets, Chicago, Illinois
Image © and collection of Brett Payne

There were many photographic studios in Chicago, and I even have a cabinet portrait of my great-grandfather Charles Vincent Payne taken at Harrison & Coover's downtown studio in August 1891. However, I don't believe there were many photographers operating in Roseland in the early 1890s, and I think it is very likely that all four tintypes were made there. However, until I find another portrait showing that identical painted backdrop, I can't be sure. To this end, I've saved a search for Koopman portraits on eBay in the hope that some will turn up in due course.

The identity of the moustachioed man remains a mystery.

References and Further Reading

Horn, Don (2003) The Pullman Photographers, Railroad Heritage, No. 7, p. 5.

Nickell, Joe (2010) Camera Clues: A Handbook for Photographic Investigation, University Press of Kentucky.

Payne, Brett (2003) Fifty Years of Payne Journeys to North America - 1890-1892 : Chicago, Pullman & the Worlds Fair.

Payne, Brett (2009) Letter to America - A moment in the life of a young girl in late Victorian Derby, on Photo-Sleuth, 14 February 2009.

Payne, Brett (2009) Whistling Bird, the Arizona Cowboy and the Disappearing Lady, on Photo-Sleuth, 1 November 2009.

Payne, Brett (2011) Fearless femmes: great-grandmother Amy, on Photo-Sleuth, 6 March 2011.


28 comments:

  1. The parallax view phenomenon is interesting & sort of like when one of my eyes wanders slightly & for a moment I see something where it doesn't belong until I blink. I still don't understand the reason behind cameras with multiple lenses, however. Of what benefit would they be in regard to the finished product? A way to make a flat photograph appear to have a degree of depth perception? There are ways to fool the eye with color, too. When we were painting stars on a black background, for instance, the art teacher among us had us paint some red, some blue, & etc. & it really did make it appear as though we were looking into the distance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was just a way of producing several copies at once - since the tintype was a direct positive, there were no negatives, and therefore no ways of making copies after the event without re-photographing the original photo. It would be interesting to try of make a stereopair from such a tintype plate, but you would need two images that weren't in the same vertical plane for that.

      Delete
    2. Ah. I thought it was something along the lines of stereo photography viewed through a stereoscope such as was popular in the later 1800s. But producing multiple prints from one single 'snap' makes more sense if there were no negatives! Rather ingenious, actually.

      Delete
    3. Yes it was pretty ingenious. Perhaps I didn't make the copy aspect clear enough.

      Delete
    4. No, I'm sure you were plenty clear. Sometimes I'm just rather dense. :->

      Delete
  2. Another quite fascinating chapter in your unique history of photography. These days we never stop to consider the technology of what we are doing when we snap away with out digital cameras or mobile phones. The effort which went into so many of these early photographs made them treasured by subject and photographer alike.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And yet you see so many unloved family photos for sale, it's rather sad, really.

      Delete
  3. It took me awhile to see the rear axle shift.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, me too, even though I was looking for it. Actually I was looking for a horizontal parallax at first.

      Delete
  4. That 9-tube camera just blows me away...what an interesting post, Brett!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wouldn't it be nice to know how to operate such a device?

      Delete
  5. I was trying to figure if that tiny girl was being held by a draped mother or sitting in an oddly shaped chair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mmhhh ... I think not, Kristin, although that was pretty common. Photographers also used soft, warm or velvety materials, even sheepskins and furs, draped over chairs like this to make small children feel more comfortable, and therefore keep still.

      Delete
  6. I'm in awe again at your mastery of the history of photography...there's so much I somehow missed in my Photo 101 class. Actually I think they taught us how to use shutter speed, f stops, and develop and print basics. Missed the history of the medium, and now I don't do any of the things they taught us!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And yet there's so much more to learn. I too did photography at school, but it really was the basics. However, it did give me enough background knowledge to generate the interest that I have today.

      Delete
  7. I wonder if little Marie ever tired of having her picture taken! Another interesting post, and I always enjoy your details!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are quite a few images of Marie in the Koopman Collection at the Illinois Digital Archives, and I suspect she may well have found it a bit of a drag - which child wouldn't.

      Delete
  8. I especially like the picture of the photographer photographing his daughter in his studio.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a good one. I'm always on the lookout for such studio shots as they proviode a wealth of information on the photographer's craft, if only you know what to look for.

      Delete
  9. A fascinating post, Brett. Though I've known about these multiple lens cameras, I've never seen a presentation of duplicate photos and how they differ. I suspect it must be very rare to have twin tintypes like this. I wonder how often photographers changed equipment and processes for the latest technology innovation. Did they toss the old cameras and chemicals for the latest film camera?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I visited the studio of WW Winter in Derby last year and was given a special tour. The firm has been going under the same name since the early 1860s, and under a predecessor for a decade before that. I was shown one of the very large camera's used from the early 1900s, and it was still being used until the 1950s, I believe. Nowadays, they're probably entirely digital - I should have asked, but didn't think of it at the time. Next time I visit, I will be sure to be better prepared with a list of questions.

      They still have a vast archive of glass plate neghatives and are seeking heritage funding to digitize them all. I would love to be involved, but very difficult from the other side of the world.

      Delete
    2. Please excuse the spurious apostrophe - can't imagine how that crept in.

      Delete
  10. Koopman's studio wasn't very big was it? But I can see that the skylights and windows would have made it into a beautifully lit space. Hopefully that tree out front didn't shade it too much!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the studio that you see in the Marie photo was on the top level of the new 3-storey building which replaced that one. Perhaps the tree was removed.

      Delete
  11. A wonderful collection. I was also interested in the photo of Koopman taking a photo of his daughter. Love the light reflector sheets :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I've seen all manner of mechanisms for controlling the lighting. This one looks a little Heath Robinson (Americans read Rube Goldberg).

      Delete
  12. Loved the interior photo of the studio. His daughter looks soooo bored!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed, she's probably been sitting there for the last hour!

      Delete

Join my blog network
on Facebook