Likely daguerreotype (photo) of Joseph Smith discovered.


mikbone
 Share

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Possibly, but I doubt it. Multiple features don't align with the death mask. It looks more like the sketches of Samuel Smith to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, mikbone said:

I agree with @scottyg 

It is interesting that my first intuition was that it didn't look at all like the death mask.  But when I took to itemizing the differences, I noticed several similarities.  I began changing my mind.

Then I noticed several giveaways that indicated they were not of the same man.

*************

I looked into this a few years ago.  The presence of the daguerreotype in the US was extremely limited during Joseph's lifetime.  We also know of Joseph's schedule during those same years.  (only a four year overlap). And they did not line up.  He simply could not have had a daguerreotype done in his lifetime.

 

They're all hoaxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Jana Riess's article, this daguerrotype and the death mask were compared by some experts using facial recognition software and there was a solid match for 19 of 21 features they looked at. I don't have access to the JWHA article that appears to be the primary source for the popular publication articles, so I cannot say more about the methodology or arguments they are using to make the argument that this is a daguerrotype of the prophet. I'm intrigued by the possibility. It seems to me that the next step would be to get some other experts to replicate the analysis and see what they say and see if a consensus develops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I looked into this a few years ago.  The presence of the daguerreotype in the US was extremely limited during Joseph's lifetime.  We also know of Joseph's schedule during those same years.  (only a four year overlap). And they did not line up.  He simply could not have had a daguerreotype done in his lifetime.

Who is the photographer?

As part of their research, Mackay and Romig found advertisements for Daguerrean lockets in The Prophet, a Latter-day Saint newspaper printed in New York City in 1844. 

According to their research, Lucian Foster, a Latter-day Saint, moved from New York City to Nauvoo and lived in the Smith mansion house for two months before Joseph Smith was killed on June 27, 1844. 

E3F03A34-861E-429A-8EB9-CFD7B0900C5D.thumb.jpeg.2abdf555ae34d73ba53c4526e9c28ab6.jpeg

“We know Foster was taking daguerreotypes after Joseph’s death. It’s been uncertain whether he was doing it before Joseph’s death, but he is the best candidate for creating it,” Mackay said.

 

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2022/7/21/23271786/does-image-joseph-smith-exist-what-one-descendant-found-forgotten-family-heirloom-lds

 

Not a smoking gun.  But, I’m pretty excited.  I’d mortgage my house to buy it if I had the chance.

 

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also evidence that the technology was around and available.  From

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/rare-original-photo-of-wilford-woodruff-discovered-on-ebay?lang=eng

F59A6C01-C68B-49B7-A512-1F314E2FB804.thumb.jpeg.ee563afe333ed93e30c71d16ca5715dc.jpeg

“Another interesting thing is an ad that was taken out in the Nauvoo Neighbor on Wednesday, August 14, 1844. It invites people to come and have their ‘likeness taken’ in the studio of Lucian Foster. On August 23, Wilford Woodruff records in his journal that Brother Foster took his and his wife Phebe’s image and ‘obtained a good likeness.’” Wilford Woodruff labored for a time as the office manager at the Times and Seasons and Nauvoo Neighbor and may have known that Brother Foster had placed the ad and likely read it as well.

4AE91686-8BB1-4960-9991-25825DC20217.thumb.jpeg.73bfd41111b3c6a9ee08bbeb361ca1f5.jpeg

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Vort said:

The current daguerreotype under discussion is newly discovered.

The time of overlap hasn't changed since then.  The only new variable is the introduction of Lucian Foster.  Curious timeline:

1) He moved in to Nauvoo two months before Joseph was arrested (two months to the day of his martyrdom).
2) Joseph was arrested in June.
3) The studio was set up in August of that year.

Is it possible that he took a photo of Joseph in that brief two month period?

If he were able to take a photo of Joseph that quickly, why wait several more months to set up the studio for the public?  It didn't take that long to set up a studio.  It is the equipment to take and develop the photo that takes the time.  If that was all set up, the studio is just a day or so of work.

Possible, yes.  Probable, no.

And we still deal with the fact that the image has distinct differences from the death mask.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LDSGator said:

This really is an amazing find. Hope it’s authentic 

I actually like the fact that it's not what I expected. If it's really a photograph of Joseph Smith, then he did not look much like I had envisioned, i.e. he didn't look all that much like the Church's visual media has portrayed him. I take some perverse pleasure in being challenged on trivial, unimportant points like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vort said:

I actually like the fact that it's not what I expected. If it's really a photograph of Joseph Smith, then he did not look much like I had envisioned, i.e. he didn't look all that much like the Church's visual media has portrayed him. I take some perverse pleasure in being challenged on trivial, unimportant points like this.

That’s my sole “issue” with this pic. It just doesn't look like him to me, judging on how I’ve seen him portrayed in other paintings . In the end though, I’m certainly no expert. If it’s him, very cool 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mikbone said:

Not a smoking gun.  But, I’m pretty excited.  I’d mortgage my house to buy it if I had the chance.

I'm curious about this.  Help me understand.

I realize many people would find this really exciting.  You're apparently one, as are many on this forum.

For myself, I don't get it.  It's a photograph.   Whether real or not, what does it actually do for us?  I don't understand it.

I understand historical records.  So, yes, put it in a museum or archive for preservation. I understand "memories".  Photographs can often spark memories of events and feelings during those events.  And if it is a memory that has faded, the photo can spark those memories and feelings anew.  Sound great.

But this is a person we have no living memory of.  We know "about" him from books, writings, stories, etc. All those things we have access to without the aid of a photo that was taken in a studio that we have no memory of.  So, what is the deal?

Maybe it is one of those things that comes from a person of my background.  But I just don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

The time of overlap hasn't changed since then.  The only new variable is the introduction of Lucian Foster.  Curious timeline:

1) He moved in to Nauvoo two months before Joseph was arrested (two months to the day of his martyrdom).
2) Joseph was arrested in June.
3) The studio was set up in August of that year.

Is it possible that he took a photo of Joseph in that brief two month period?

If he were able to take a photo of Joseph that quickly, why wait several more months to set up the studio for the public?  It didn't take that long to set up a studio.  It is the equipment to take and develop the photo that takes the time.  If that was all set up, the studio is just a day or so of work.

Possible, yes.  Probable, no.

And we still deal with the fact that the image has distinct differences from the death mask.

I see your logic...

1) We know Lucian Foster was advertizing producing lockets with daguerreotype in New York prior to his arrival in Nauvoo.  

2) We know that Lucian was staying at the Smith mansion house prior to Jospeh's Martydom.  Probably arrived in May or early June. 

3) Daguerrotype technology had just been developed in 1839.  This technology is quite complex:  First you have to have a highly polished silver surface (90% purity) usually on a copper plate substrate.  Then you have to sensitize the silver plate with halogen fumes (iodine, bromine, or chlorine).  The plate then has to be exposed with the subject to receive the reflected light (usually taking from a few seconds to a few minutes).  The plate then has to be developed in heated mercury fumes.  Then, the image had to be fixed with exposure to sodium thiosulfate.  Sometimes a gold chloride solution was added to give the image a slightly warmer tone.

4) Copper silver plates, mercury, and sodium thiosulfate are likely not available at the 1844 Nauvoo Walmart.   Lucian Foster no doubt arrived in Nauvoo with all the supplies that he had procured in New York. 

5) I assume that it took some time to set up the studio.  

6) He probably started taking the pictures and selling them via word of mouth.

7) When you take out an ad in the local paper in 1844 it likely takes weeks or even longer to put together the ad.  Bring it to the publisher.  Do the printset & the final publication.

😎 Lucian Foster most likely came to Nauvoo with the intent to take a daguerreotype of Joseph Smith.  

9) Joseph Smith would have given the locket with the picture to his Wife Emma.

10) We have the provenance that the locket was in possession of the Smith Family.

 

The death mask was of Joseph lying supine probably 8-24 hours after his death. There was no muscle tone in his body.  People's apearance change depending on being upright or supine, with and without muscle tone, not to mention the spirit leaving the body.  

Because daguerrotypes take a few minutes to expose the subject had to sit very still without moving, especially not changing facial expression.  

Death masks, artist impressions, digital photos, and daguerrotypes will all have a different appearance.

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm curious about this.  Help me understand.

I realize many people would find this really exciting.  You're apparently one, as are many on this forum.

For myself, I don't get it.  It's a photograph.   Whether real or not, what does it actually do for us?  I don't understand it.

I understand historical records.  So, yes, put it in a museum or archive for preservation. I understand "memories".  Photographs can often spark memories of events and feelings during those events.  And if it is a memory that has faded, the photo can spark those memories and feelings anew.  Sound great.

But this is a person we have no living memory of.  We know "about" him from books, writings, stories, etc. All those things we have access to without the aid of a photo that was taken in a studio that we have no memory of.  So, what is the deal?

Maybe it is one of those things that comes from a person of my background.  But I just don't get it.

I'm a collector.  I'm also a visual learner.  I also have studied the life of Joseph Smith in great detail.  I know what he was going through during this time in his life.  

I'm stoked that we finally have an image to put to the stories.

Praise to the Man!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I'm a collector.  I'm also a visual learner.  I also have studied the life of Joseph Smith in great detail.  I know what he was going through during this time in his life.  

I'm stoked that we finally have an image to put to the stories.

Praise to the Man!

So in your view, this picture is accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

So in your view, this picture is accurate?

We will see within the next few months.  As I already stated, I would mortgage my home and spend every cent to purchase the locket and image. 

I'd like to see what some of the Saints with skill in photoshop can do with the image. 

I'm fairly excited. 

C99086DF-5DA6-4C80-B3C8-77D9A8F52426.gif.80438b4c3e8667f677f92abfabeb4083.gif

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

1) We know Lucian Foster was advertizing producing lockets with daguerreotype in New York prior to his arrival in Nauvoo.  

Agreed.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

2) We know that Lucian was staying at the Smith mansion house prior to Jospeh's Martydom.  Probably arrived in May or early June. 

I understand he arrived on April 27th.  I did not know he was staying at the Smith mansion at the time.  That is certainly a fact that pushes the meter more towards credibility.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

3) Daguerrotype technology had just been developed in 1839.  This technology is quite complex:  First you have to have a highly polished silver surface (90% purity) usually on a copper plate substrate.  Then you have to sensitize the silver plate with halogen fumes (iodine, bromine, or chlorine).  The plate then has to be exposed with the subject to receive the reflected light (usually taking from a few seconds to a few minutes).  The plate then has to be developed in heated mercury fumes.  Then, the image had to be fixed with exposure to sodium thiosulfate.  Sometimes a gold chloride solution was added to give the image a slightly warmer tone.

Yes, yes.  I'm familiar with the technology.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

4) Copper silver plates, mercury, and sodium thiosulfate are likely not available at the 1844 Nauvoo Walmart.   Lucian Foster no doubt arrived in Nauvoo with all the supplies that he had procured in New York. 

Makes sense.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

5) I assume that it took some time to set up the studio.  

No, the studio (the place where pictures are taken) doesn't take much time at all.  My father (a professional photographer) had a mobile set that he could set up in an hour.

It was the gathering of equipment, supplies, etc.  Then the actual equipment to be used needed to be set up.  If he already set it up prior to the prophet's death, then he could easily have moved it the few blocks away to his residence.  It would have taken maybe a day to have people help him move the stuff.  But it wouldn't have taken four months.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

6) He probably started taking the pictures and selling them via word of mouth.

7) When you take out an ad in the local paper in 1844 it likely takes weeks or even longer to put together the ad.  Bring it to the publisher.  Do the printset & the final publication.

It certainly took longer than today's technology.  But according to the latest tour of the print house in Nauvoo, they said it took a couple of days for a full article.  The only reason for it to take longer is if it required unusual artwork.  That article you posted only had common text.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

😎 Lucian Foster most likely came to Nauvoo with the intent to take a daguerreotype of Joseph Smith.  

I could believe that.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

9) Joseph Smith would have given the locket with the picture to his Wife Emma.

10) We have the provenance that the locket was in possession of the Smith Family.

If all the rest happened, that would certainly seem reasonable.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

The death mask was of Joseph lying supine probably 8-24 hours after his death. There was no muscle tone in his body.  People's apearance change depending on being upright or supine, with and without muscle tone, not to mention the spirit leaving the body.  

That is a good point.  And it would explain the difference in the cheek-to-mouth crease that I noticed.  But it does not explain other differences.  Perhaps there are other explanations for these additional differences.  But there are still other differences.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Because daguerrotypes take a few minutes to expose the subject had to sit very still without moving, especially not changing facial expression.  

This may actually counter the previous point above.  The reason why people didn't smile in old photos is that it is difficult to smile for 20 to 30 min a stretch.  Smiling takes muscles.  Death does not.  The muscles in the cheek bones don't droop.  Fatty cheeks do.  Joseph was not a fatty.

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Death masks, artist impressions, digital photos, and daguerrotypes will all have a different appearance.

Yup.  Agreed.  I disagree that this fact explains ALL the differences I see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I'm a collector.  I'm also a visual learner.  I also have studied the life of Joseph Smith in great detail.  I know what he was going through during this time in his life.  

I'm stoked that we finally have an image to put to the stories.

Praise to the Man!

I think I sort of understand.  I'm not really a collector myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

This may actually counter the previous point above.  The reason why people didn't smile in old photos is that it is difficult to smile for 20 to 30 min a stretch.  Smiling takes muscles.  Death does not.  The muscles in the cheek bones don't droop.  Fatty cheeks do.  Joseph was not a fatty.

Holding your face in a pose does take quite a lot of concentration, dicipline, and muscle tone.  

For example, you can look at a photo of a person who has recently had a stroke or partial fascial paralysis

2932FF83-D041-4E54-B636-7DE1CC4B22A3.thumb.jpeg.4c7b5a64f84bc6b2cb286b2f43e59df0.jpeg

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the similarity in the nose structure, but the lower jaw and eye corners look different to me.  Maybe that’s attributable to Joseph’s face having reportedly been bashed with the butt of a musket postmortem; I don’t know.

My bigger question is:  why didn’t we know about it before now?  The locket is traced to 1869 when Joseph III’s (second) wife, Bertha Madison, is wearing it in a photograph.  Bertha Madison has a life sketch up on FamilySearch.  She only converted to (RLDS) Mormonism in the mid-1860s, seems never to have met the Prophet, and would have been barely a year old even if she had.  Why is she carrying around the picture of a father-in-law she never met, and why is she apparently the only member of a Restorationist sect who possessed such a picture?  Joseph III lived until 1914 and the locket remained in the family—he knew it existed and, if he thought it depicted his father, he could have had the picture reproduced and published anytime he wanted.  Why didn’t he?

Looking at her photo in FamilySearch, Bertha Madison Smith has sort of pronounced lower jaw. almost puffy-ish lower cheeks and mouth, and drooping outside corners of the eyes that to my mind resemble the face of the man in the newly-discovered photo.  This is just a guess; but to my mind the man in the locket is more likely some family member of hers—perhaps her father Mads Madison (1813-1893).

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share