Cycleback.com: Guide to Identifying Daguerreotypes, Tintypes and Ambrotypes Tintype: Early image on a thin iron plate resembling tin. By far the most common of the three for sports subjects. Daguerreotype: Early mage on a silver-coated copper plate. The rarest and most valuable for sports subjects. Ambrotype: Early image on a transparent glass plate with a black backing. Rare for sports subjects. People are surpised to find out that many 1800s photographs were not paper but glass and metal. The standard metal and glass photographs are the Duaguerreotypes, ambrotypes and tintypes. These are popular with collectors and come in different sizes and presentations. Daguerreotypes and ambrotypes were originally housed in special cases discussed later in this chapter. The tintype can be found au natural, in cases, frames and paper envelopes with openings for viewing. These metal and glass photographs were the dominant form of photography until albumen prints. The Daguerreotype was the first practical photograph and proved popular with the public. It was replaced by the cheaper Ambrotype, which was replaced in popular use by the tintype and albumen carte de visite.

The tintype waned in popularity by about 1890, but was produced into the early 1900s. The Daguerreotypes/ambrotypes/tintypes (for the rest of this chapter referred to as 'D/A/T' shortness' sake) were made with a different photographic process than photographic prints on paper. With modern paper photography a glass or plastic film negative is first made, and this negative is used to 'print' the image on paper. With the D/A/T process, a negative image is made on a solid plate of metal or glass, and that is the final product. Due to a special black backing, the image appears to the viewer to be positive tonally (dark to light), though is reverse laterally (left to right) as with a negative. Any letters on an athlete's uniform will be backwards. While countless paper prints could be made with a negative, almost every D/A/T you find is unique. The photographic process produced one and only one photo. There was a process for making copies, but it was rarely used. Amongst today's collectors Daguerreotypes are considered the most desirable and attractive, the Ambrotype the next most desirable and the tintype third.

Sizes D/A/T photographs come in many sizes. Metal and glass plates were manufactured then sold to the photographer or photography studio. The photographer could use the entire plate to make a large photograph, or, as was more common, cut up the plate to make multiple smaller photographs. As a result, most tintypes have irregular cuts including crooked edges and clipped corners. The listing below this paragraph is a general size range for these photos. Variations are to be expected. Size is often described as a fraction of the plate: 'full plate,' 'half plate,' and so on. The full plate is the rarest and most desirable size with collectors. The half plate is the next rarest. There are rare and highly desirable examples of double full plate, about twice the size of a full plate. There are differences of opinions on the exact sizes, with the below listing coming from the California Historical Society.

* Full plate - 6-1/2 x 8-1/2 * 1/2 plate - 4-1/4 X 5-1/2 * 1/4 plate - 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 * 1/6 plate - 2-3/4 x 3-1/4 * 1/9 plate - 2 x 2-1/2 * Gem tintypes: 1" X 1" or smaller. Gem tintypes were most popular in the 1860s and are often found in small card-like envelopes. Mirror of Race Press AN OVERVIEW OF EARLY PHOTOGRAPHY The Mirror of Race website provides basic information about each of the images displayed in its on-line exhibition. This information is fairly standard in any art-historical scholarship, but those new to this topic may want some further explanation of the terms. MAKER: Each images had its maker, of course, but it is worth keeping several things in mind about this.

First of all, the early forms of photographic process (the daguerreotype, the ambrotype, the tintype and the albumen print, to name the most common ones) were very difficult to learn and perform, expensive in terms of their equipment and apparatus, and sometimes very dangerous (for example, developing a daguerreotype requires heating up mercury until it gives off fumes, and the wet-plate processes include chemicals that can — and often did — explode if improperly handled). For the most part, in these early years, only people who intended to make photography their trade learned how to do it. This is why most of the early photographs are portraits: the main business of commercial photography was in portraiture. Early photographers often did not sign their work. Sometimes, they indicated their identity by stamping their names on the mat of the photograph, or on an advertising card on the back of the image, or by a label or some similar device. Such identified images are perhaps only 5-10% of what now exists from the earliest period. The rest are anonymous. Even when an inscription on a mat or a label can identify an individual maker, this does not necessarily mean that this person actually made the image.

The production of early photographs was complex and labor-intensive, and many photographers — especially the more successful ones, such as Matthew Brady — employed large numbers of people to help them with their work. This process included receiving and preparing the client for the portrait, preparing the photographic plate for exposure, setting up the camera and the client for the shot, exposing the plate in the camera, developing the plate, and finishing it for the client (which could involve applying color to it by hand, placing it in a brass mat and a case made of wood and paper or sometimes an early version of plastic called thermoplastic). In fact, the most famous and successful photographers might never meet most of their clients: they ran large studios where teams of “operators” would set up and take the actual photographs. Most early photographs were made in a studio. This is because the early photographic processes were difficult and cumbersome: they required a great deal of sensitive equipment to prepare and develop, and lighting conditions had to be optimal. Still, some brave practitioners loaded up wagons with their equipment and went out into the countryside in search of customers. These were called “itinerant” photographers.

It should be remembered that in the mid-nineteenth century, the United States was still an agrarian society: most people lived and worked on farms and in the agricultural industries, often too far away from cities just to come in for a portrait at a studio. Finally, we call them “makers” because a great many early photographers in the United States considered themselves to be artisans and businesspeople rather than artists. The vast majority of early photographers learned the process not to produce art, but rather to make a living by taking portraits. The process was too difficult and too expensive for just anybody to do it as we do today, as amateurs. Although some early photographers argued forcefully that photography was an art, like sculpture and painting, it might surprise us today to learn that most of the “authorities” on art in the 19th century did not consider photography to be an art at all — it was merely a form of mechanical reproduction of images in their eyes, a skill practiced by tradesmen without talent, rather than a true art form. SITTER/SUBJECT: The vast majority of early photographs are portraits of ordinary people who went to the photographer to make an image for close friends and family.

At first, photographs were very expensive, but by the mid-1840’s competition had driven the prices down far enough that even a laborer could afford a modest portrait. Sometimes, the customer would write his or her own name on the image, or a family member would do so on a slip of paper on in a case. But just as we today rarely label our own photographs when we give or receive them, because we know who our friends and loved-ones are, and they know our faces, so too did the consumers of photography in its early years usually leave them unlabeled: they knew who the portraits were, and that was enough. Photography then was usually a private matter, made for friends and family, not for the general public. But the connections of friendship and family are often lost in time, and so what were once intimate records of a person — attempts at visual immortality — have now, ironically, become anonymous. A much smaller number of photographs were of subjects other than a particular person. Some were outdoor scenes or buildings, some were objects or animals. Sometimes, a place or an object can be identified.

It should be remembered that early photography, because it was expensive and difficult, was rarely informal or whimsical: the client usually had a reason to have the photograph made — perhaps to record a prize-winning bull, or to commemorate the building of a house. With the advent of the glass-plate and albumen print process in the mid-1850’s, which allowed for the mass-production of images, a greater variety of subjects came into circulation, because photographers could make prints not just for private clients who commissioned the image, but for a wider public that might be interested in the subject. GENRE: A genre is a type of work of art, categorized by its style, its form or its subject matter. The genres of early photography include the following: Portrait: What defines a portrait is that the focus of the image is upon the individual identity of the sitter or sitters, even if we no longer know who these are. In this sense, we can even find portraits of dogs and cats, as well as of people. At the same time, an image can include people without being a portrait. Early photographic portraiture drew heavily upon the long tradition of painted portraiture.

In this period, painted portraiture was so expensive that only the very wealthy could afford it. By comparison, photographic portraiture was inexpensive, but it still generally adhered to the conventions of painted portraiture, if only to capture some of its status. This is why most early photographic portraits seem so severe to the modern eye: to have one’s portrait made was still understood to be a serious matter; this was a person’s opportunity to record him- or herself for the ages. There are several types of portrait, although the vast majority of portrait photographs were simple studio portraits of ordinary people: Commercial: Although this category strains the sense of “portrait,” there were some photographs made of animals or objects used for commercial purposes. An inventor might take an image of a patented item to bring on a journey to show to prospective investors; a breeder might have a “portrait” made of a prize bull. Ethnographic: Portraits of this type in the early period (1840’s through 1870’s) are extremely rare. An ethnographic portrait depicts the subject not as an individual person but rather as the example of a supposed human type.

The earliest know example of ethnographic portraits in the United States are the images made in the late 1840’s by J. T. Zealy, on commission from the Harvard naturalist Louis Agassiz, of slaves from South Carolina plantations. Itinerant: Some early photographers would travel by wagon among rural villages and farms to get the business of customers who were too far away from the larger towns and cities where the fixed studios operated. Itinerant images often look less polished and more “naïve” than studio portraits: for example, instead of an elaborate backdrop, there might be only a fabric or canvass hung up behind the sitter, the composition might be eccentric, or the pose might be stiff or unconventional. Occupational: Having one’s portrait taken was considered an important occasion in the period of early photography, and often the sitter gave careful thought to his or her self-presentation. For many, their profession or occupation was a defining feature of their identity. A seamstress might pose with her sewing kit, a minister with his Bible, a carpenter with his tools, a mill worker with her shuttle and scissors, a fireman with his gear, or a soldier in his uniform.

Postmortem: Death was an ever-present reality in the mid-nineteenth century; it was not something that could be ignored or avoided, as it often is today. Disease was common, and illnesses that we can cure now with antibiotics were frequently fatal. Women were especially vulnerable in childbirth, and children often died in the first years of their lives, falling victim to disease. For many families, the only memory that they might be able to secure of a departed loved-one would be a photograph taken shortly after the person’s death. Many photographers specialized in this trade, advertising that they would come to the homes of the departed to make a portrait. Studio: This is by far the most common genre of early photography. Such portraits were produced in set locations, where the photographer would have the optimal conditions for receiving the customer, controlling the lighting, processing the photograph etc. Scene: A scene is a depiction of a place, event or activity. Scenes were fairly uncommon in the earliest period (1840-1860), when most of the trade consisted in portraiture. After the development of mass-produced images from glass-plate negatives, the market for scenes grew, once photographers could produce them cheaply and relatively easily.

Architectural, private: Some clients would commission a photographer to make an image of a private home. A home of one’s own was a matter of considerable pride. Architectural, commercial: A successful merchant or businessman might commission a portrait of the shop or factory where he did his business. Architectural, civic: These are quite rare in the earliest period, again because of the lack of a broad market for them. They are characterized by an interest in the public importance of a city-space or building. Cityscape or townscape: These are quite rare in early photography. They were difficult to make, and, perhaps more to the point, there was not much of a market for them until the development techniques for the mass-production of images. Commercial: The new techniques of mass production, associated at first most widely with the albumen print processes, allowed photographers to produce images intended for a large commercial market, rather than for individual clients as had been mostly the case with the daguerreotype and ambrotype processes.

Historical or topical: With the advent of processes that allowed for the mass production of images, some photographers made images of historical places or events (usually after the action had taken place because of the difficulties involved in capturing live action with the early equipment). The most famous of the early practitioners of this genre was Matthew Brady, whose operators took photographs of Civil War battlefields after the battles and soldiers in their camps. As the techniques developed and made photography more mobile, photographers sought to capture a wide variety of topical subjects, from the sights of foreign countries to local points of interest. Landscape: In the earliest period of photography (circa 1840-1860), true landscapes, with no persons or human construction visible, are fairly unusual. This is because it was quite difficult to get the equipment to such settings, and also because there was little commercial demand for them. Once mass-produced techniques became available, then landscapes became more popular, but daguerreotypes, ambrotypes and tintypes were one-of-a-kind items, and so a specific individual would have to have a good reason to go to the expense of commissioning one in the outdoors, far from a commercial studio.

Occupational: Another rare type is the scene that depicts people at work in a particular trade, profession, or occupation, such as a teacher teaching, or mill workers in a factory. These became more common with the mass-produced techniques. Performer: A specialized sub-category of the occupational portrait is the portrait of the performer, whether in the theater, in music, or in a circus. Such portraits were sold to a broad public and the performers themselves would use them as advertising — but again, this only really became possible with the coming of mass-produced photographs. The public in the United States developed a strong taste for such images in the mid-19th century, following the success of performers such as Jenny Lind, the so-called Swedish Nightingale. Social/Political: Mass production, based on photographic processes such as the albumen print, led to the use of images for social movements and political causes. An example of this in the Mirror of Race exhibition are the various images of former slaves that were sold to raise funds for freed slaves in the occupied South during the Civil War. Staged: Also uncommon is the staged scene, where the photographer sets up a shot to give the illusion of action taking place.

Because of the long exposure times in early photography, it was next to impossible to capture actual action. PROCESS: This category covers the various techniques used in the United States to produce photographs in the early period. These processes included the daguerreotype, the ambrotype, and the tintype, as well as the albumen print processes: the carte de visite, the cabinet card, and most early stereoviews. The fundamental features of the various early processes are as follows: Daguerreotype (1839 to the early 1860’s): An image produced on a silver-coated copper plate. A daguerreotype will often have a haunting three-dimensional quality, and it will reflect like a mirror. The successful production of a daguerreotype demanded much skill and labor, and so new and easier techniques rapidly replaced it. A daguerreotype is a unique image; there is no negative from which to make copies. Wet Plate Processes: The following processes are all based on the wet plate technique. This involves placing light-sensitive chemicals in a transparent, sticky substance called collodion and then coating a photographic plate with the wet, gooey collodion and then exposing it in the camera.

Ambrotype (1854 to the mid-1860’s): The ambrotype is a photographic negative on a glass plate, made to appear positive by a dark background (either dark glass, dark paint, or black fabric or paper). Although cheaper than the daguerreotype to produce, the ambrotype was heavy and vulnerable to breakage, and it was replaced by the tintype, the carte de visite and the cabinet card. Although the ambrotype was treated as a unique image in the photographic trade, each one produced for a single client, it is in principle possible to print copies from an ambrotype plate. Tintype (1856 to around 1900, but continuing in places through the 1930’s): Despite its name, the tintype is a photograph made on a thin piece of darkened iron (it is also sometimes called a ferrotype, from the Latin work for iron). The tintype was popular because it was light and durable and comparatively cheap to produce. Tintypes became especially popular in the Civil War period, because soldiers and their families could easily send them to each other through the mail.

Tintypes are unique images; there is no negative from which prints could be made. Some photographers used cameras with multiple lenses to make multiple tintype portraits of a sitter at the same time. Glass plate negatives and albumen prints (1851 to around 1910): By the early 1850’s, inventors had discovered how to make a photographic negative on a glass plate. This allowed for the mass production of prints from these negatives using paper treated with albumen (egg whites) as the support for light-sensitive chemicals. This revolutionized the photography business by the 1860’s, because now the maker could produce copies for a wide market of consumers, not just for individual clients. Photographic firms would mount large printing arrays on the tops of their buildings, where they could print copies from their plates in the sunlight, because there no adequate artificial light had yet been invented.

The most common forms of photograph using the glass plate and albumen print process were the following: Carte de visite (introduced in 1854): The name, carte de visite (abbreviated as CDV or cdv), is French for “visiting card.” Victorians used visiting or calling cards as a way of leaving their names when making social and business visits, and the carte de visite adopted this tradition as its own. The carte de visite became enormously popular in the Civil War era: because they were made on paper with a thin cardboard backing, they were light and easy to mail, like the tintype, and they could be reproduced from the glass negative, so one could give copies to friends and family. The typical carte de visite was somewhat larger than a modern business card or credit card. Cabinet card (introduced in 1863): The cabinet card is a larger format print on paper, backed by a more rigid cardboard mount. Stereoview (introduced in the mid-1850’s): A stereoview is a photograph made by a camera with two lenses placed side-by-side in such a way that the image produced, when look at in the appropriate viewing mechanism, appears three-dimensional.

There were stereoview daguerreotypes and ambrotypes, but the process really became successful and widespread with the development of mass-produced albumen prints. DIMENSIONS: Most early photographs came in standard sizes. Just as today, when we buy film or have our negatives developed by a store (or even our digital images printed by an on-line company), standardization makes the process simpler. Photographic plates came in standard sizes for daguerreotypes and ambrotypes, as did the cases in which they were displayed; at first, tintypes followed these standards, but then developed others.

Standard plate sizes were as follows: Sixteenth plate: 1-3/8 by 1-5/8 inches Ninth plate: 2 by 2-1/2 inches Sixth plate: 2-5/8 by 3-1/4 inches Quarter plate: 3-1/8 by 4-1/8 inches Children and Youth in History | Children and Daguerreotypes (19th c) Children and Youth in History Children and Daguerreotypes (19th c) Paula Petrik, George Mason University Why I Taught the Source Most state-level world history standards include study of primary sources and encourage the use of visual documents. Although students are surrounded by visual stimuli, they "look" but seldom "see." As a result, students often view photographs as snapshots of reality; they are more "true" because they capture "what really, really happened." For historians, there are several ongoing debates about the periodization of childhood and its transformation over time. When did children become important and in what capacity? As economic contributors? As the focus of emotional attachment or as subjects prone sentimental idealization? As political symbols or pawns?

The goals for this exercise are, therefore, two: to demonstrate how images are socially constructed and to begin to get a handle on the changing role of children in American society. I use a print handout for this exercise. Detail is important in daguerreotype, and print's greater resolution preserves the image's subtleties and color. In contrast, computer monitors or LCD projectors blur details and shift color. So, a color handout is provided in PDF format. How I Introduce the Source My introduction to the source consists of two parts: the technical and the personal. Daguerreotypes were influenced by their technical requirements, so I take a little time to explain the history of daguerreotypes and how they were made. Experience has demonstrated that one of the easiest and most accessible methods is via a clip from the J. Paul Getty Museum (approx. 6 min.). Whatever the approach, it is important to emphasize several elements dictated by a daguerreotype's technical requirements. First, the daguerreotype necessitated a relatively long exposure time; in other words, the photographer's subject had to sit still for an extended period of time.

(You may want to have students attempt to maintain a smile for 20 seconds to demonstrate the difficulty of holding a pose for even a relatively short time; long exposure times also explain the absence of smiling sitters in early daguerreotypes.) Second, even though daguerreotypes put personal images within the reach of many more people, they remained relatively expensive and reserved for those who could afford them. Third, daguerreotypes were one-off images in that they could not be reproduced; a daguerreotype was not a negative that could be reprinted multiple times. Fig. 2 Fourth, daguerreotypes were fragile; the image could be easily scratched. Because a daguerreotype was essentially a mirror, it could tarnish from exposure like a silver spoon. (See Fig. 2.) Last but not least, a color daguerreotype was possible. For an additional cost, daguerreotype images could be hand-colored with special paints. The personal part of the introduction draws on students' own experience and centers on the question: What do we, as human beings choose to remember with photographs? I ask students individually or in groups to think for several minutes and make a list of images they or their families keep.

What photographs appear on the walls at home? In family photo albums? On social networking sites? The discussion generally turns up baby pictures, birthday parties, first communions, bar (bat) mitzvah parties, vacation snapshots, high school and college graduations, weddings, basic training or officer training completions or promotions, 50th wedding anniversaries, the unfortunate party photo, and so on. (For some ethnic groups, the memorial or postmortem photograph is still common, and it is worth noting this phenomenon.) As the students or groups make their contributions, the list goes up on the board or on-screen. Once the lists are complete, I want the students to differentiate between professional and amateur images in order to maintain the parallel between daguerreotypes and contemporary studio photographs, so I ask students to determine which of their photographic choices were taken in a studio or by a professional photographer. Their selections go in second, smaller list. Once the latter list is complete, we discuss the elements common to the people or events captured in the images (milestones, achievements, celebrations) and what events are missing from the list (people at work).

We finish the discussion with two final questions: What does analysis of the lists tell us about what people in the late 20th and early 21st century choose to remember? And, more specifically, what do we choose to remember about children and youth? With that, we shift centuries and turn to the daguerreotypes. Reading the Source Fig. 3 I've approached reading the sources by asking the students to work both individually and in groups, and either strategy works well. Usually the size of the class dictates whether group or individual work will be most effective. In either case, I begin by asking students to note who and what is in each of the images. What are the sitters wearing? How would you characterize the clothing? If there two people, do they lean toward one another or away? How are their arms or hands posed? Where are the subjects looking? Are there any objects in the portraits? Once we have established what is in the photographs, we move onto more abstract considerations. Fig. 1 What can we make of the hat in Fig. 3? What does the clothing suggest about the social class of the sitters? (Note the gloves in Fig. 3.) Why, for example in Fig.

3, might flowers be associated with girls? What do the flowers contribute to ideas about girls, in Fig. 1? Or, do they appear in the image for a different reason? What does the boy's association with animals in Fig. 4 suggest? How do the colorized images add to our understanding of the sitters' social class? There are also elements in the images that are ambiguous and underscore the limits to historical inquiry. Is the donkey in Fig. 4 a pet or a working animal? We don't know without corroborating evidence. Is there evidence solely from the image to support either claim? If not, how would you go about finding evidence for your claim? Fig. 4 Reflections To reflect, I ask the class to return to our discussion about contemporary photographs and articulate what has changed (or not) with regard to the depiction of childhood and youth in photographs from roughly 1840 to the present. What usually emerges from the discussion are observations and arguments supporting the importance of children and their central place in family history and photographic memory in both centuries. Students are also apt to view both contemporary and 19th-century children's photographs no longer as simple images but as constructs, encapsulating gender definitions and class distinctions.

Students also note the transformations; namely, an increased emphasis on adolescence (proms, school graduations, athletics), an absence of postmortem or mortuary photographs, a greater informality in dress and pose, and few if any images of children or youth at work. Last but not least, I pass out 4x6 note cards and ask students to write a paragraph in which they make a brief argument—including a thesis and two pieces of evidence in support of their proposition—about childhood in the 19th century based on the daguerreotypes. Alternately, I ask them to post an argument paragraph to their blogs. How to Cite This Source Paula Petrik, "Children and Daguerreotypes (19th c)," in Children and Youth in History, Item #174, (accessed January 19, 2017). Tags The Social Construction of the American Daguerreotype Portrait: The Occupational Portrait Chapter Four The Occupational Portrait The occupational daguerreotype is a marvelous example of the power of the daguerreotype to construct a social existence, one that crossed its literal borders in space and time.

In the mid-nineteenth century, a variety of men (but few women) had staged pictures of themselves taken at work, from artisans and clowns to engineers and preachers; they chose to have their lives represented by the day-to-day activities of their occupations. The development of this genre of daguerreotypes can be linked to the history of occupation in America and to the history of its representation. (1) The era of the daguerreotype was one of distinct and rapid change in the life of the American worker. For increasing numbers of laborers in the mid-nineteenth century, an occupation was temporary. Many young men were moving from the country into the cities, and around the new nation; these men were trained only in farming, without long-term roots in, for instance, one of the crafts of the city. A rapidly developing market system, furthermore, gave temporary employment for peddlers, salesmen, and swindlers of all kinds. None of this tends to suggest the occupational daguerreotype, with its ability to express occupational pride and to express the occupation as essential.

(2) Figure 15 The structure of urban work also changed during this period, making it more receptive to untrained immigrant labor, from the countryside and from Europe. For the first years of the nineteenth century, the artisan was one of the central figures of the American city. Artisans had a pride in their work and their independence that was directly linked to republican values. In Newark, for instance, Independence Day parades centered around representatives of each craft from the 1780's until the late 1820's. (3) In the 1830's, however, manufacturing shifted sharply from the artisan to the small factory. While certain fields, including blacksmithing and carpentry, were not industrialized for the rest of the nineteenth century, the urban cultural climate changed permanently. Even when artisans remained, the apprentice system that had preserved their guild-like unity did not. The artisan's social framework, with its mix of guild elitism and republican values, faded and was replaced with a capitalist one. (4) The turmoil of the workplace was not limited to the lower and lower-middle classes.

Samuel Haber has suggested that the elite role of professionals, including doctors, clergymen and lawyers, was threatened, beginning in 1830, by the rise of egalitarian ideology and capitalist mobility. In medicine, as in urban industry, the apprentice system faded, to be replaced in this case with medical colleges. Established clergy lost some of their stature to evangelical preachers and other religious populists. (5) The legal profession was democratized, to some extent, by the reform and codification of law (which had been governed largely by precedent, requiring an enormous body of knowledge), and shifted into the realm of capitalism with the advent of fees contingent on a victory in court. While all of these professions thrived, eventually, in new surroundings, they all felt the sting of a loss of status at mid-century. (6) Figure 16 I argue that the anxiety and change in the workplace, while it could have stifled pride, did the opposite. The tenuous position of the occupation and of its social status -- for young migrants, for artisans, for professionals -- led to pride, albeit a desperate kind of pride, in occupation.

I argue especially for this view in the case of artisans -- they saw their ways of living, and their crafts, disappearing, and responded by having portraits taken of themselves surrounded by their tools and their products. Several genres of representation, in painting and in photography, can be seen as contributing to the development of the occupational daguerreotype. In discussing these, I do not intend to imply a simple temporal progression; the styles that I discuss existed simultaneously, more or less. I do, however, argue for some kind of causal relationship. The conventions and cultural forms that these paintings and photographs display were transferred from genre to genre, and those forms shifted, in the process, toward the pride and individualism of the occupational portrait. Figure 17 Occupational daguerreotypes evolved, like death portraits, from conventions of painting. Genre painting, which centered around realistic, if sentimentalized, portrayals of ordinary people, flourished in the United States in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The paintings sometimes served to show occupational pride, as in an early example, John Singleton Copley's famed 1768 portrait ( Figure 15 ) of Paul Revere with the tools and product of his silversmithing.

Most, however, were not posed portraits of specific people: they acted as "snapshots," attempting to portray a typical moment, either at work or play, in the life of ordinary people. The rustic paintings of Asher Brown Durand fall into this category (see Dance of the Haymakers, 1851, in Figure 16 ), as do paintings like William Sidney Mount's Eel Spearing at Satauket (1845) and Francis William Edmonds' The Image Peddler (1844), Figure 17 , showing an itinerant sculptor selling his work. (7) Figure 18 One genre of daguerreotypes is virtually indistinguishable, medium aside, from these paintings. These are "art" photographs: highly contrived accounts of a moment in the life of a worker, and were generally titled, not as a portrait, but a typical event, in the style of the genre painting. Driving A Bargain ( Figure 18 ) shows a blacksmith selling a horseshoe to a boy. The blacksmith is truly a blacksmith, no doubt, and the boy may well have been his customer, but the photograph does not attempt to represent their lives.

Rather, the daguerreotype, together with its title, creates a sentimentalized, funny, and fictional moment, with the subjects as cultural types: the earnest child playing grownup, the hardworking, kind fellow playing along. (8) Like this daguerreotype, the genre painting of the poor rural worker was sentimental and condescending, often showing workers, black and white, engaged in mindless play. Take, for example, Asher Durand's Dance of the Haymakers ( Figure 16 ), which includes the landlord and his wife, on horses, watching their employees from a distance. The condescension of our gaze at the oblivious subjects is doubled by the presence of upper-class watchers in the painting itself. Before commissioned daguerreotypes of Americans at work became widespread, the genre had to develop conventions that showed respect for the subject, and it did, adopting the pride of the Revere portrait in Figure 15 ; the pride of a subject who is aware of his viewers, and looks back at them. An intermediate category that fulfilled this requirement emerged as well: a genre of a documentary work photographs.

These photographs, taken, largely, in California and other parts of the west, used many conventions of the occupational portrait, though they were driven by different impulses. While the documentary quality of these photographs is paramount -- they are the ancestor of the documentary photographs of our century -- there is also a sense of pride and individualism that is missing from genre painting and its photographic equivalent. Figure 19 For our example, we take an anonymous photograph from around 1852 of California gold miners at work ( Figure 19 ). Like genre paintings, the photograph professes to have caught the miners in the middle of their work, in a typical moment. Here, however, the photographer has taken special care to show each stage of the mining process, with each subject carrying a different tool. In a very conscious way, the photograph constructs a picture of the mining process that oversteps the temporal bounds of the photograph. In a single moment, it portrays an entire day. The photograph can also be distinguished from genre paintings by the relationship of the subject to the camera and the audience. Unlike the oblivious subject of a genre painting, and of the closely related "fictional" photograph, the miners in this photograph confront the audience, full of pride in their work.

Figure 20 The sense of dignity that this sort of photograph gave to the worker was augmented when the photograph was a commissioned portrait; the independent, "republican" artisan could exert direct control over his representation. This control was illusory in part, of course -- the subject was at the mercy of the daguerreotypist and the conventions that he maintained -- but it was a powerful symbol nevertheless. The photograph in Figure 20 is a typical artisan portrait. The toleware (a form of intricate metalware) maker is pictured clothed in his traditional apron, holding a product of his labors and one of his tools. The vague, superficial convention is, as it is in the photograph discussed above, that we have caught the toleware maker in mid-work in his studio -- he apparently lugged a great deal of his work to the daguerreotypist's studio for an extra level of realism -- but this convention, unlike the mining portrait, is not expected to actually fool anyone. The convention is simply accepted as "accurate" in a certain way: as depicting the typical, everyday moment of the toleware maker, and in the process, the essence of the worker.

The display of toleware has two functions in addition to creating the illusion of the workplace. Like the mining portrait, the various objects create a sense of the passage of time, as the artisan has moved from product to product. Their primary function for the subject, though, was probably the expression of occupational pride. Figure 21 A second example of this form can be found in Figure 21 . A blacksmith, clothed in his traditional apron, is holding his hammer up as if he is about to hit a horseshoe. Again, the pose was not expected to fool anyone into thinking that the camera had captured him at work. Instead it served to represent his whole life as a blacksmith. In this case, in contrast to the toleware maker's portrait, the worker's life is represented using social time -- the typical action of his work -- and the social space of his occupation is left largely to our imagination. (9) Figure 22 The convention of the artisan's portrait was obvious in a sense; to show him working. Conventions of the middle-class professions were more complex.

On a certain level, the photograph of Hyram White, an engineer for Taunton Locomotive Works, in Figure 22 , simply shows him doing what he does in a typical moment -- designing railroad cars -- and proudly displaying his work. However, while the daguerreotypist removed his standard middle-class marker, the "parlor" table, when photographing the toleware maker, he emphasized it here. It is not, I think, that Hyram White worked in his parlor in a suit: he probably had a desk, and worked in his shirt sleeves. Instead, this widespread convention served to give White occupational and social standing, as a professional and a gentleman, as if he was demonstrating his profession, but on a social visit. For the toleware maker, artisan and citizen were conflated roles; his portrait represents his essential identity by presenting his work. For White and for others in the middle class, there was a separation between the work persona and the private persona, and even an occupational portrait had to reflect this. (10) These two categories of the occupational portrait contain the starkest examples of convention.

But occupational daguerreotypes were taken of many men who fell into neither category; painters, clowns, hunters, surveyors, and soldiers were often photographed in studios, but with no background and no props besides simple implements, as if to avoid the dichotomy between artisan and professional, and to express the physical transience of their occupations. Some examples show the persistence of the parlor convention, even when it becomes incoherent; one clown is pictured uncomfortably at the classic parlor table. (11) Figure 23 Finally, we turn to a subtle but crucial issue of the occupational daguerreotype: gender. Any conclusions we draw about women's occupational daguerreotypes are suspect because there are so few examples of them. Our first conclusion might be based on that point alone; the daguerreotype represented women as they were perceived: socially or domestically, but not as workers. The most common occupation that is represented, of course, is motherhood, either implicitly, as with the mother and child portraits discussed in chapter two, or more bluntly, as with a single, fascinating photograph of a woman breast-feeding a baby (see Figure 23 ).

Was this a spontaneous "snapshot," with the baby deliberate enough at her mother's breast that an exposure could be made? Or was it an intentional construction of the mother's role? Figure 24 The second, even more rare category of women's occupational portraits is represented by Figure 24 , a Southworth and Hawes portrait of the Boston actress Mrs. James R. Vincent. In certain, subtle ways, the portrait may represent her career as an actress; she is standing, her expression is more emotive and less dreamy than most female portraits, and the flower in her hand could be a prop or a post-performance bouquet. However, while the portrait does not specifically place her in a domestic setting, it avoids, too, placing her in a professional one; the portrait avoids the issue of her ambiguous status, somewhere between wife (her own first name is nowhere to be found) and actress. The issues in reading an occupational daguerreotype are complex and elusive to the point of confusion; so, too, were the self-images they represented. Issues of occupational pride, for most people, collided with issues of social standing; only artisans, who were threatened with extinction, seemed to have a clear sense of how they wanted to be portrayed.

In an age dominated by the private, domestic world of the middle class, the occupational portrait stands as testament to the world that was being displaced, one in which a man's job was his identity. Early Photographs Early Photographs 1850 Encased Daguerreotype of brother and sister Introduction: Baseball cards as we know them can be traced not only to the rising popularity of baseball in the mid-1800s, but to the early development of photography and commercial printing processes. The earliest memorabilia does not resemble baseball cards but by the 1870's the public sentiment and commercial forces were ready for the first baseball cards. This chapter shows the solid-type photographs and early mounted paper photographs. I will start with a brief explanation of modern photography. In modern photography the photographic image is first captured as a negative image on film within the camera. The negative image is then used in the photographic laboratory to make multiple prints on chemically treated paper. Thus for each photograph there is a single negative and multiple prints. The single negative is a negative image of the photograph in which dark-is-light and right-is-left. The printing process restores to normal the positive image on the photographic paper.

Solid-type Photography (1839-1890s): Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes and Tintypes The first practical photographs were not paper like today's, but on a sheet of metal or glass. In 1839 a French artist named Louis Daguerre perfected the Daguerreotype, a photograph made on a silver covered copper sheet. A primitive photograph on paper, called a Callotype, was introduced a year later but the Daguerreotype proved more popular. The exquisite detail along with the silver-mirror quality gave these Daguerreotype an almost magical appearance. Some considered it impolite to stare too long at those people in the photograph. The Daguerreotype images are stoic. It took several minutes to expose the negative, meaning that the subjects had to sit or stand completely motionless for the duration or ruin the photograph. No doubt quite a challenge for the brother and sister in the above photograph. You will find many subjects conveniently propped by a chair, table or special stand. It was not until just before 1900 that film exposure time was reduced so that snap shots or action shots could be taken.

Unlike today's photography where one can make many photographic prints from a single negative, the Daguerreotype was the negative. There were no duplicates. If you own a daguerreotype it is a '1-of-1.' These photographs were delicate and held in special cases. These cases vary in design and are often stylish and colorful. As a negative shows lights as darks and darks as lights, a black backing was put behind the image to correct the contrast. The negative's mirror image could not be corrected, so all images including writing are in reverse. The public was enamored with these images. The prices however was prohibitive, and subjects and owners were usually middle-class to rich. Luckily for baseball collectors, the New York Knickerbockers and other pioneer team were made up of middle-class businessmen (doctors, store-owners, etc), and some Daguerreotypes of these pioneers can be found. An attractive and clear Daguerreotype of an early team or significant player would be a centerpiece of even an advanced collection. For most of us, the soon-described tintypes are the most attainable of solid-types. Not only were Daguerreotype expensive, they were dangerous to make.

Toxic chemicals including mercury were used ('Mad as a Daguerretoypist,' was a saying). Cheaper and safer solid-types were introduced. The Ambrotype was made on a piece of glass, while the Tintype (aka ferrotype) was made on a piece of iron. As with the Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes and Tintypes have a black backing to correct the contrast, and the images are in mirror reverse. While the Ambrotype was short-lived, the tintype was an especially cheap way to make photography and lasted until the early 20th Century. Many people collected Tintypes and housed them in special albums. You could call them the first family albums. As baseball was becoming a popular sport, there are many tintypes of men and boys posing in their baseball uniforms. There are family pictures with a toddler holding a ball or bat. These amateur tintypes, especially ones that have clear attractive images, are sought after. A tintype of a star like Cap Anson or King Kelly would prove to be quite a find. Examples of Solid-types 1850s Ambrotype of Active Baseball Club of New York City. 1870s Tintypes of unknown players.

Even though these are unknown subjects, they sold in a national auction for nearly $400 each. The poses, image clarity and condition are determining factors in the price. Equipment and elaborate uniforms are desirable. 1870s Tintype of two Anonymous Players (detail on right). Notice that the letters on the jerseys are in reverse. 1860s-70s Tintype and case with baseball equipment advertising closeup of above: He's smoking a clay pipe. 1870's Tintype 1880s Tintype: left, and on right in case. 1870s Tintype: This is an especially large example, on a full plate, allowing us to view beyond the pose. Large examples are quite desirable. The smallest examples are the proverbial 'dime a dozen.' 1890 Tintype: The uniform, including 'pillbox' cap, shoes and hefty glove help date this. Tintypes were used into the 20th century Paper Photographs: Albumen Prints, Cabinets and Cartes de Viste * Albumen Print A photograph made from a glass negative on a piece of paper coated with egg whites.

* Carte de Viste: an albumen print measuring about 2-1/2" X 3-1/2" on a cardboard backing (mount) measuring about 2-1/4" X 4" * Cabinet Card: an albumen print measuring about 4" X 5" on a cardboard mount measuring about 4-1/2" X 6." Albumen photography was a great advancement in photography. Photographers had long hoped to create multiple photographs of high quality. The Daguerreotypes were of top quality but each was unique. Multiple Callotype paper photographs could be made but the quality was poor. While the Callotypes used a negative to make the photographs, the negative was on a piece of regular writing paper. This meant that the grain or irregularities in the paper appeared in the photograph. Photographers wished to use a smooth glass plate as the negative but didn't know how to make the developing chemicals stick to the surface. Albumen, a sticky substance in egg whites, was found to work. With albumen on the glass plate negative and on the paper, multiple photographs of high quality could be made. The images are no longer reverse like the solid=types.

Most of the 19th Century photographs were Albumen Prints. This includes the well-known photographic baseball cards such as Old Judge and Kalamazoo Bats. The Albumen Photographs were on a very thin paper and were usually glued to a piece of cardboard called a mount. A large one of these 'cards' was a Cabinet Card, so called because it was often displayed in a cabinet. A miniature version is called a Carte de Viste. These Cabinets and Cartes pictured hundreds of subjects from Presidents to actresses to family members to nature scenes to city-scapes. Cartes were often used as calling cards. For example, a man may leave his Carte de Viste (with his photograph) with a business associate or friend. In fact Carte de Viste is French for 'visiting card.' Local stores often sold Cabinets or Cartes of famous people. Collecting these and pasting them into albums was a popular hobby. As with tintypes, there were many baseball subjects including local teams and youth players. There can be found Cabinets and Cartes of well-known teams and famous players. Single-player subjects are more available them team cards. Whether one considers mounted photographs to be baseball cards is up to opinion.

Most consider only cards used for commercial use to be true baseball cards, and would categorize these as photographs or memorabilia. But if these are not true baseball cards, they are merely a step away. Many tobacco cards of the 1880s resemble these photographic cards. 1860 Carte de Viste of Cooperstown, New York. circa 1870 carte de visite. It is not Ross Barnes as labelled, 1869 Carte de Viste of the Cincinnati Red Stockings: This significant Carte shows the great team including the Hall-of-Famer brothers Harry and George Wright. Composite designs of numerous single-player photographs like this were popular. Numerous composite designs were used. 1877 Carte de Viste of the Boston Bostons (showing front and back). The championship team was headed by the great shortstop George Wright. In fact, the back has been signed in pencil, 'Compliments, Geo. Wright.' 1870s Cabinet Card of an unknown team. 1871-72 Mort Rogers Scorecard: this rare four page booklet with scorecard and advertising has a photograph within the cover's oval hole.

Most scorecards do not have photographs, though all are highly collectable. Lithographed scorecards are shown in the Early Prints chapter. ___________________________________________ Even with the introduction of massed produced commercial baseball cards starting in the 1870s, non-commercial Cabinet Cards photographs were still popular into the early 1900s. Non commercial Cabinets and photography can be found depicting Hall-of-Fame players to youth and women's teams. See Non-Commercial Cabinets Photographs of the 1880s and 90s. . A Brief History of Photography home > 1865-1897 > technology > photography history A Brief History of Photography Because images are such an important part of the Authentic History Center, this section was created to give very brief descriptions of the evolution of photograph technology, accompanied by examples of each technology. DAGUERREOTYPE: 1839-1860s This technology was named after French theatre owner and inventor, Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre, who introduced the public to his new invention in 1839.

Perhaps the most beautiful of photographic processes, it uses a polished, silver plated sheet of metal and is easily recognized by its mirror-like surface. The plate has to be held at the correct angle to the light for the image to be visible, but the image is extremely sharp and detailed. Daguerreotypes were typically sealed in one half of a hinged case that was convenient both for transport and display. Daguerreotypes were produced in various sizes and remain highly collectible today, their value heavily dependent on condition and subject matter: Daguerreotype Plate Sizes The Daguerreotype - Tips - Old Photographic The Daguerreotype Tips and Tricks - Tips The daguerreotype was the first profitable method of producing a photographic image. The daguerreotype image was produced by projecting and exposing the scene in direct contact with the photographic plate which was placed within the camera. The process is called direct positive photography. The first daguerreotype plates were produced by cladding, or cold-rolling silver foil over a thin sheet of copper and was known as Sheffield plate. DaguerreotypeBefore the plate could be used to produce the daguerreotype, it first had to be cleaned and highly polished to a mirror finish.

The plate was then placed in a box and exposed to iodine fumes until the surface was a golden yellow color. When the iodine fuming process was done, the plate could be installed in the camera and the daguerreotype taken. In order for an image to be produced on the daguerreotype plate it was necessary to expose the plate to the scene for as many as twenty minuets, thus apparatus were employed to brace a subjects head and body still while the daguerreotype was being taken. Once the plate was exposed for the correct amount of time it could then go on to the next phase. Upon removing the plate from the camera, it was then exposed to mercury vapors until the image was developed. Finally, the plate was washed in a saline solution to remove the iodine residue and rinsed in distilled water to remove the saline solution. The result of this lengthy process was an image which had a mirror like quality which had to be viewed at a certain angle in order to see the positive. Daguerreotypes are extremely prone to abrasions and the slightest touch will destroy the image. The silver surface of daguerreotypes are also prone to tarnishing.

Therefore, once the image was developed the daguerreotype was then placed under an inner preserver mat and a piece of glass, then taped to seal it from exposure to air and dust. An outer preserver mat was placed over the taped package and the whole bundle was then usually placed in a container called a union case, or daguerreotype case which further protected both the daguerreotype and the glass. Sixth Plate Daguerreotype Union CaseEarly daguerreotype cases were made from wood which was covered in a very thin layer of leather, but later union cases were elaborately designed boxes made from an early thermoplastic material sometimes incorrectly referred to as gutta percha. Although daguerreotypes can run into the thousands of dollars for a rare example, common examples can be purchased for as little as twenty fife dollars. The type, and design of the case that the daguerreotype is in also determines the final price of the daguerreotype as well, and can add hundreds to the price. daguerreotypes are considered by many to be one of the most beautiful photography formats ever produced, and today they are highly sought after for addition to photography collections.

<p>Sorry, your browser cannot display frames!</p> All Things Ruffnerian, a Design Blog and More: Daguerreotypes ............................................................................... Image is 2.75" width x 3.25" height I call this daguerreotype "The Gentleman from Maine" because the dealer from whom I bought it spent every summer buying in Maine. Plus, he's my idea of the quintessential 19th century New Englander! In all the years I've been collecting, I've never come across a daguerreotype in as pristine condition. To handle this case is to experience it just as the gentleman did when he received it new. Most daguerreotype cases were covered in leather, like this one. (Later, they would be covered with a paper that convincingly simulated leather.) With years of handling, the two halves - which were hinged with leather - would often wear apart into two pieces. Once that happened, more damage was bound to occur. If you happen to have a case that's still in one piece, a little neatsfoot oil will keep the leather supple. Daguerreotype cases took a lot of abuse through the years.

In the 1920s, younger people would sometimes discard the daguerreotype altogether and use the holder as a nifty cigarette case. Who knows how much history has been lost for the sake of a good smoke! ............................................................................... Images are 2.75" width x 3.25" height I call this May-December pair "The 1849 Couple." That's because the gentleman is wearing the same style of collar and tie that President James Knox Polk did when he presided over the 1849 Mexican War. The gentleman's young wife is corseted to an alarmingly tight degree! Pres. James K. Polk, 1849 You'll often see a daguerreotype covered with what seems to be hundreds of little scratches. Look again, and you might notice that the "scratches" are doubled, meaning that they're merely dust reflected from the outer glass. ............................................................................... An alternative to the leather case was an upgrade to what was called a "gutta percha" case. Gutta percha is a natural rubber from the Malaysian gutta percha plant, seen below.

In fact, according to the George Eastman House, the gutta percha case was nothing of the sort. It was actually an early shellac-based plastic dating to 1854. (I will continue to refer to cases on this page and the pages about ambrotypes and tintypes as "gutta percha" because that's the term commonly used by dealers and collectors.) Image is 2" width x 2.5" height You'll notice that all of the cases so far, and the ones that follow, have simple, undecorated brass frames. The designs on the velvets are relatively simple, too. That's an indication that they're early daguerreotypes, probably dating from the 1840s to the mid-1850s. Of course the most obvious way to date a daguerreotype, aside from an inscription, is by the style of clothing. This gentleman is decidedly pre-Civil War. If you look to the right of this young man, you'll notice some very fine lines. These are not aging or damage per se, but rather marks that were made when the silver surface of the daguerreotype was burnished with a cloth, right before the exposure.

............................................................................... As you can see, the cases could also be a rich chocolaty brown. Gutta percha cases were popular right before the Civil War, so they started appearing with patriotic themes. People called them "union cases," and this is a fine example of a union case. The medallion is inscribed with a line from Henry "Light-Horse Harry'" Lee's famous eulogy of Washington - "First in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen." Image is 2.75" width x 3.25" height I've always imagined that this rugged gentleman might have been a sea captain. ............................................................................... Image is 2.75" width x 3.25" height Here's a freckle-faced fellow who looks as though he's ready to take any dare. He came with only half a damaged daguerreotype case, but what a treat it is! Apparently our young friend was an avid reader of lurid dime novels, and for some reason he pasted a page into the case. The hero of the story is nearly scalped and exclaims, "Good heavens!" Now, take a good look into this young man's eyes.

You'll notice from the reflection that he was sitting in a room with a very large window. That's a good indication that he went to a well-established photographic studio. In those days, the long exposure time required a lot of natural light, so studios would usually have large windows. Occasionally the window would be on an angled wall, not unlike a partial greenhouse. I've created an illustration to show how it might have appeared. ............................................................................... Image is 2.75" width x 3.25" height The brass frame in this case indicates that it's a very early image. The brass is a heavy gauge of metal, and the oval decoration is engraved. As daguerreotypes progressed, the brass frames became thin, and their decorations were embossed. I would cast this boy, with his handsome velvet jacket, as the hero of a Dickens novel. I look at him and wonder whether he survived the Civil War. He would have been about 20 in 1860. ............................................................................... Image is 2" width x 2.5" height This image is not original to its case.

I know that as a fact, but in any case, I don't think the more elaborate velvet matches the age of the brass frame. Notice that the last two boys have worn their jackets buttoned at the top and bottom, with the other buttons undone, an interesting fashion statement. ............................................................................... Not all daguerreotype cases were made of leather or gutta percha. I've seen beautiful (though badly damaged) cases made from paper maché, and then there's this lovely velvet case. The metal plaque is inscribed "Souvenir," and the case opens by depressing a button. It has the look and feel of a fine jewelry box. Image is 2.75" width x 3.25" height The white material is a ribbed satin. The gentleman's name was William R. Mann. To put this image in proper perspective, when William R. Mann was born in 1823, there had been only five U. S. presidents, Lafayette was on a tour of the country, and Beethoven was releasing his 9th Symphony. ............................................................................... Image is 2" width x 2.5" height I'll continue to add to the gallery as I acquire new pieces.

I bought the above image as I was preparing this page. The daguerreotype, its brass frame and the glass that went over both, were all sealed by the photographer with a fine paper that went around the edges. That was to keep the daguerreotype from darkening through oxidation, and it was a normal practice. Nonetheless, in the ensuing 160 years, the seal decayed, the image oxidized, and that's why you see a dark halo around the frame. I have consulted a Web site called measuringworth.com, which says that one dollar in 1850 (the approximate date of this daguerreotype) would have been worth $27.29 in 2007's currency. That would mean that the lady bought her daguerreotype for the equivalent of about $6.82. That still seems low considering all the exotic materials, but don't forget that such portraits were a huge fad, and that thousands upon thousands of these were sold. ............................................................................... In the early 1990s, Martha A. Sandweiss, curator of Amherst College's Mead Art Museum, was inventorying a storage vault.

There she found "ten small bundles carefully wrapped in brown paper and tied with twine." They hadn't been opened in over 40 years. To her astonishment, when she unwrapped them she found daguerreotypes of the greatest Americans from the 1840s, including Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams. I like how Martha Sandweiss describes what it feels like to discover a long-lost daguerreotype of President Jackson: "I unwrapped one and then opened the daguerreotype case I found inside. There was Andrew Jackson, staring with calm resignation at the face of death. The image was familiar from many reproductions. It was on April 15, 1845, at the Hermitage, his plantation home near Nashville, Tennessee, that Andrew Jackson, seventy-eight, last posed for his photographer. Gravely ill and in constant pain, the ex-president and military hero had to be propped upright with pillows. Two months later, he was dead. The best of the portraits from the session was engraved for a popular image of Old Hickory as he appeared "in his last days." Then the original, haunting portrait disappeared. Daguereotypes are magical things.

On the shiny silver-coated surface of a copper plate, finely delineated photographic images seem preserved as if by alchemy. While images on paper can be printed in countless numbers from an original negative, each daguerreotype is unique, a direct positive made without the mediating agency of a negative. When I cradled the great missing portrait of Jackson in my hands, I held the plate that Jackson had actually gazed at through the camera lens on that long ago afternoon at the Hermitage. The light reflected off his face had impressed his image forever on the sheet of metal."

Question: Of which common item was a Daguerreotype an early example?
Answer: A PHOTOGRAPH