More Photos From Vintage Family Album; Taking Photos Up Close Is Better For Intimate Appreciation

Charles and Maude Thorn in their Hillier, Ontario home in the early 1900's.

Drilling machinery for the windmill pump to the right; a proud team owner.

From the early 1900's photo album belonging to  Charles and Maude Thorn

What a great early 1900's photograph of farm life in rural Ontario; from the Hillier area.

WHEN WE TRIED TO JAZZ-UP THE REMEMBRANCE DAY CEREMONIES FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR NEWSPAPER

GETTING THE BEST PHOTOGRAPHS DIDN'T REQUIRE A FISH-EYE LENS, OR ZOOM APPROACH, TO CATCH THE MOOD OF THE MOMENT

     I like antique and vintage photographs, whether from a studio setting, or just the happenstance of a family photographer, trying to capture interesting moments of kin folk interactions. The magic of a box with a lens, film, that took pictures, you could eventually hold in your hand, and frame for the wall, has been a fascination that has lasted a long time. Now it's morphed into something more exceptional, with the improvement of technology, and the downsizing of equipment needed to make interesting images by those who don't consider themselves either artists, or photographers of any note. But yet, they turn out good quality pictures none the less. Older photographs interest me because of the base amount of technology used, and the fact, it came down to the inner creative genius of the photographer, who ultimately had to frame what he wanted to highlight, be that with a wreathing of evergreens on the front lawn, the doorway of an old house, the rose garden at the side of the dwelling, or the pumpkin patch in the back forty.      While you don't get a lot of this in staged photographs, there's still an innocent, naive quality about these old portraits, and the attire of the subjects, with of course studio backdrops, that makes them stand-out amongst even later, better, more expensive studio art pieces. As I am a big fan of "actuality" and "raw" photographs, depicting what couldn't be staged, I've, needless to say, been entranced by the Hillier, Ontario photo album, that I've been presenting on this
 blog since Sunday. It's not like these family albums from around this period are customarily void of these unstaged photos, but this one is a little more exceptional, by the fact, this family, specifically Charles and Maude Thorn, have insisted on a more Victorian approach, as seen in their poses around their Hillier property. When these images were taken, it was well into the 1900's, Queen Victoria having been deceased for over a decade or more, and the horror of the Titanic sinking, still fresh on the minds of Canadians.
     The only striking difference, as I study them, is the way the images have been framed by the photographer. I haven't ruled out, taking every one of these portraits, and running them together on one page, so that you can more readily see what I'm referring to, as I've pointed out in the description above. If you know what I'm referencing as "American Gothic," the title of a well known painting, showing the husband, pitchfork in hand, standing with his wife, in front of their heritage house, then you'll appreciate the parallel to the Thorns, giving that same general appearance, but without the farm implement. There's a story buried within these dozen portraits, of this stoic duo of Hillier citizenry. I've included another example of these naive portraits, to companion tonight's blog, as posted above.
     As a companion to today's photo collection, from the early 1900's album, put together originally by the family of Charles and Maude Thorn, of Hillier, Ontario, that we recently acquired, on our weekly antique quest, I've put together a short piece about the good graces of basic, no frills, honest photography, as is clear in this dog eared old album, full of amazing images, captured on a run of the mill camera from the period. No special enhancements. Budget equipment with no frills. Captured moments in family and work history, that tell no lies. It's what I like most about antique and vintage photographs. The fact they haven't been doctored, or enhanced in any way, other than normal photographic licence, of where the cameraman might stand, for example, or think is a good framing for a picture, provides someone like me, the satisfaction of seeing the past without distortion; other than what comes with glue marks, ages-old fingerprints, folds in the images, damaged surfaces, and missing corners. Like the value of an old pine harvest table, or jam cupboard, the signs of wear are just as honest as the photographs themselves. They were taken as a family record, and not to sell product. An associate photographer taught me how to stay honest in the picture taking business. Here's what I learned from Jim Ford, an award winning Canadian photographer.
     Most of the readers of this little editorial piece today, won't know who Jim Ford is, and what he might have to do with an article on Remembrance Day ceremonies. Nothing. Jim's passion for photography, showed me a better way of capturing emotion in the images I took for our publication, which at the time, was The Bracebridge Herald-Gazette.
     I met Jim Ford, who was also a freelance pharmacist working in the area, at a home show at the Bracebridge Arena, when I had just begun working with the editorial department of Muskoka Publications; and at the same time, we had a company booth right beside Jim, who was exhibiting some of his fine photographs, especially his milestone image of two Inuit children playing in the snow. This was an adopted photo for the International Year of the Child, back in the very early 1980's, if memory serves correct.
     Seeing as we both had some time to kill, in between visitors to our respective booths (I took turns manning the newspaper's cubicle), we talked about our mutual interest in photography. At that point, I was pretty green about newspaper photography, and my equipment was pretty sub-standard compared to Jim's cameras and accessories. I was also an aggressive user of the kind of lens equipment that could detect a tick on a bare branch of a tree, from about a mile's distance. I had use of a few of the company's toys, like a fish eye lens, that gave a "fish bowl" look to photographs, and the joy of the big lens, was that I didn't have to get up close and personal with the folks, and events I was attending on newspaper business. There are some old school photographers who believe using these powerful enhancements, is good for the private detective, trying to catch an image of a cheating spouse, but not so much, for capturing emotion, so close in fact, you can, at the same time, offer a kleenex from your pocket, to a subject in need.
     Back to Jim Ford. Jim captured the image of the two Inuit children at play, with a 50 mm camera lens, which isn't much more than what the human eye represents, in terms of enlargement. Most of the 35 mm cameras from my vintage came with a standard, no frills, 50 mm lens, and that was suitable for most occasional no-frills-needed photographers. There are times, of course, such as at accident scenes and fire calls, when being at a safe distance is necessary, meaning a higher power lens will keep the cameraman out of harm's way, while still affording opportunities to capture the news aspect of the scene. Jim wanted to be as close to the youngsters as possible, while still giving a goodly amount of space in the frame, for the snowy environs of the place and day to show through and set the tone. He didn't want even the slightest distortion of the honest emotions of the situation. So using a basic lens was perfect, and it contributed to his award winning photograph.
     I didn't want him looking through my camera bag, so I kept kicking it under the table, further and further out of sight. I had at least four big telephoto and zoom accessories in there, and I didn't want Jim to see that I was uncomfortable, as a photographer, getting too close to my subjects. Except, of course, with group photos where a big lens wouldn't help much. I spent hours talking with Jim about his photographic work and background, and he signed a photo of the Inuit kids, which I still have on my desk at Birch Hollow. He also sent me a signed copy of his book, "Oasis in Time," which I also still have in my archives. The point I want to make with this lengthy introduction, is to point out, it was a turning point for me in terms of news photography; and what I would accept as editor from our roving reporters, in terms of similar, unrealistic distortion of images, that should have been taken up-close and personal. It brings me to Remembrance Day ceremonies, held at the cenotaph in Bracebridge's Memorial Park.
     For the first few years of my association, with Muskoka Publications, I was asked to take photographs at the park ceremonies, on November 11th, and the darkroom technicians, also photographers themselves, thought it would be neat to get really jazzed-up images of the event. In other words, "use your toys boys", to make these plain images the "best yet." Sometimes we'd have two or three reporters with cameras on site, during the wreath-laying ceremony, all with different lens attachments, none with 50 mm style appliances. When we'd go over the selection with the technician, after they were all developed, truthfully, the most exaggerated ones usually got the call for front-page placement.
     I don't know what readers thought of the images, (I don't remember getting many letters to the editor about them) that we assumed were brilliant representations of the memorial service; but in my opinion, especially after talking with Jim Ford, there wasn't an honest image amongst them, and it went on this way for years. Until I realized, one day, thinking about the work of Jim Ford, that we had gone way beyond sensible proportion, taking fish eye lens images of veterans and dignitaries laying wreaths. Our ace photographers thought it was better than okay to play around with these images, and were quite reluctant to see it my way. Simply because the expensive equipment they had in their camera bags, had to be justified, and taking these somewhat distorted images worked for them. Just not for me. I was editor, and I wanted to get back to basic photography, for our news pages, that on these occasions, could also be called heartfelt, intimate images. Showing, for one thing, that the photographer appreciated the emotion of the occasion, and captured it on film. So I changed some of the game plan, for front page photographs at least, and coverage of solemn events, such as Remembrance Day ceremonies. There were times, of course, when the lens diversification did work, and gave the desired affect to companion a feature story. But artistic flare wasn't always suitable for events having a sombre characteristic. I didn't like, for example, when a photographer would lay on the ground and shoot-up at the cenotaph, just as a dignitary or veteran was laying the wreath. Especially when it gave the appearance of being a light-hearted occasion, with billowy clouds against a blue sunlit sky as the framing. I don't consider myself a conservative except when it comes to the demonstration of reverence to situations that deserve a more serious study and presentation. I had photographers give me aerial overviews and these looked goofy as well, and missed the mark in my opinion. Feature photographs are a little different and you can play around with special enhancements. These photos go in the back of the paper, not in the news pages.
     Working with a 50 mm lens, demanded that the photographer get close to those being captured on film, and that did make for some awkward moments, when I nearly got trampled, being unable to get out of the way fast enough, not to be clobbered with a wreath in the head. But what I got, in up-close emotion, was worth being yelled at to "get out of the way stupid." The emotion of the event is best experienced up close. You can feel the aura of these individuals, at the same time as you're taking their photographs. You can't get the same sense, standing way, way back. It might be more convenient in one way, but it denies the photographer the opportunity to get close to the actuality, of the individuals with important stories, emotions, you might say, that were worn on their sleeves. Getting what you might say, is a truer, more honest picture, from a position where a photographer can very much see the whites of his subject's eyes. Then the tears welled-up would be more clearly visible. By the way, this is really what a news photographer wants to capture. This is where we changed for the better. We could still make use of our toys, tucked in the camera bag, but for events such as Rememberance Day, it was unacceptable to fob-off the job on a big lens, and a stand-offish perspective. This is one event that needs close coverage, and a small, normal lens covers that territory as well as your own visual interpretation.
     Jim Ford was right, and his explanation, and the photo collection I was able to view, proved to me, the value of being a reporter / photographer the old fashioned way; by being close enough to the human subject, as to be able to, with a step or two, shake their hand, pat them on the back, or offer a hug, at the conclusion of the shoot. The art is in the emotion of "connection," and he has made a name for himself in photography, because of this intimacy with his subjects.
     The images shown in today's blog, as taken from the early 1900's album, put together by the family of Charles and Maude Thorn, formerly of the hamlet of Hillier, Ontario, (Prince Edward County, near Belleville), were taken with a most basic lens and no frills camera, and some of the photographs are, simply stated, works of art by someone who wasn't intending that particular result. They just wanted a clear photographic record of their family. What they got, was a naive, folkish, heritage collection, of what it was like to live and work rurally, in the early part of the 1900's in Ontario. There are no embellishments except where, for example, Charles and Maude chose to stand on their property; and in today's case, it was in the doorway of their 1860's homestead, looking hauntingly similar to the painting, "American Gothic," but instead, "Rural Ontario Conservative".
     Thanks so much for joining me for today's blog. Lots more coming this Christmas season.