1. "Sepia Lizzie"
Posted by Stefani on Aug-13th-02 at 5:59 PM

I found this very nice image of Lizzie in sepia. Kat has reminded me that Michael Martins told me once that the images the FRHS owns are sepia prints. Perhaps this is a scan of one of those? Anybody with a collection of the photos from the FRHS---can you confirm this?

My brother has a photo of Lizzie from the FRHS, I'll have to check with him and see if he can tell me if it is sepia or just plain ol' black and white. 

A hundred years ago, sepia photography was a very popular media for portraiture.  It was also used to a lesser degree in other areas of photography.

I have a copy of the picture you have posted. It is also from the FRHS but it is black and white.  Additional photos in my collection from the FRHS are also black and white.

Many old pictures have faded into yellowish tones and are often mistaken for sepia prints. Sepia prints, by definition, are predominately brown.

"Sepia" refers to the ink from octopi (?), and is brownish.
Sepia photographs came from a chemical substance that was expensive and rare (?). Or was it from radium salts?

So do you think, Bill, that this is a sepia print or a faded image. I really like the color. It makes me almost see her IN color. She seems more real in brown or sepia.

That is good to know about the Historical Society's prints. Thank you for the info.

It is also possible that this is a colorized Lizzie, I suppose.

Let's see if I can find one of her with red hair for Edisto!

found proof, Edisto, that Lizzie had red hair and blue eyes!

Wow, Stefani!!!  I didn't know that Lizzie was a Goth chick? 

Anyhoo, I checked with my brother on the photo he got from the FRHS and he said that it is in black and white.  He also said he remembered that there was a list with thumbnails of the photos you could order and they were offered only (as he remembered) in black and white. 

In June, 2001, the FRHS said they were changing developer labs so as to get the best prints possible "in this case sepia".  It sounds as if prior to that date, they were not completely satisfied with the excellence of the work, and were willing to go way out of their way (Rhode Island) to achieve the best results.  (Which would naturally include an understandable increase in price).
If prints in the hands of collectors were acquired previous to the end of June, 2001, and were b/w, maybe the newer versions will be sepia, as originally intended?

(Message last edited Aug-15th-02  4:42 AM.)

Stefani,
As a footnote to my message of 8/14:

Sepia prints are produced during the developing cycle.
Sepia toning is a chemical process performed on the print whereby the silver in the print is converted to a compound.  This produces the distinctive sepia coloration.  To the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing as a sepia negative.

(Message last edited Aug-15th-02  10:48 AM.)

Sepia can also be applied to a black and white prints after the original processing.  Kodak had a preparation that would develop a print in sepia or a different preparation (a toner), that could be applied after the photo was processed and dried.  The print that is black and white is then wet with water and then submerged in the sepia solution.

There is also a selinium toner that makes the prints blue/silver but it quite hazzardous to work with.

The toners preserved the prints.  If when printing the photo was not washed enough, the result would be a print that would get brown spots that could not be removed and hence not archival or musuem quality.

Sometimes when printing in black and white I have stained prints with coffee or cranberry juice to give the print a different color.

Also, black and white photos can be handcolored with pencils or Marshall oils to give added depth.

WOW! Ask a question around here and you get perfectly wonderful answers!

THANK YOU Tracie and William. So much interesting info on printing photos. And so clearly explained to the novice.

Does this mean that a CHOICE is made to develope into sepia, from any negative?

Isn't this, then, a matter of personal aesthetics?
It may enhance the character of a print, but will it lose some contrast and definition?  Crime scene photo's should probably stay black and white?  (Maybe they will...they are only a few compared to the vast array, archived at the FRHS, I'm imagining...)

(Message last edited Aug-15th-02  8:32 PM.)

Hi Kat,

Yes it is a choice, black and white or sepia.  I agree with you that the prints of a crime scene should remain black and white, but that is my preference.  I can see no reason why anyone would want to sepia a crime scene photo, except to make it look old.  Like all those country fair photos that people put on ganster or cowboy and saloon girl costumes and have their pics taken.

I do not think that a sepia print loses anything, like detail because it has to be composed and developed with the same principles of black and white. 

Thanks for the expert info.
It is much appreciated!
Where ya been?

Hi Kat,

I'm here, there and everywhere!!

Actually, I had been debating leaving the message board, because of all the business with David.  I was having a difficult time reading the posts with all that anger expressed at you and Harry and then I had to add my two cents worth.  Thus, David really got angry at me which was not what I wanted, but was expected.

But anyway, anyway, I can't stay away......

T