Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11
    Coromandel
    Guest

    Default

    Benjamin Wyles was still around in 1891, shown as a photographer & painter at 201 Lord Street, Southport (RG 12/3036, f.104, p.32) and on the very next page of the census enumerator's book, at 16 Nevill Street, is Samuel Mallin (photographer).

    So far I've not found 15 Nevill Street on any census. Many of the properties in Nevill Street were shown as unoccupied on the 1891 census. The 1911 enumerator's list explains why: it describes numbers 1 to 27 Nevill Street as 'lock-up shops, offices, &c.' not used as dwellings. By then no. 16 was also a lock-up shop, not used as a dwelling.

  2. #12
    malcolm99
    Guest

    Default

    Yes, Wyles had moved up the road by 1885 and his adverts in the 'Amateur Photographer' show him at 54-62 Neville Street (evidently a shop with a 1st floor studio). He must have been doing very well to support such a large establishment. From other entries on Google it appears he also sold cameras.

    https://www.
    archive.org/stream/amateurphotogra00unkngoog#page/n288/mode/2up/search/wyles

  3. #13
    Coromandel
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malcolm99 View Post
    ...and Charles Holden, 23, photographer is living at 4 Bradley Street, North Meols RG11/3748 fol. 123 p. 20.
    Lo and behold at 5 Bradley Street is a William Holden and family.

    Now from the TNA we know that William Clark and Charles Holden collaborated on a photograph of “Dog sitting by fence” and that Clark took an Oval portrait of William Holden,see: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a...1192&cid=-1#-1 ) and so that seems some sort of proof that they were working together around 1881.

    I’m not sure this moves things on very much, but I thought it was interesting.
    On the contrary, malcom99, it's an important piece of the jigsaw: Charles later went on to set up his own studio in Rusholme, and this site about Rusholme photographers says he had been apprenticed . . . guess where . . . at 'the studio of Benjamin Wyles in Southport':

    https://
    rusholmearchive.org/rusholme-photographers

  4. #14
    malcolm99
    Guest

    Default

    Well done Coromandel - it's good when odd pieces help build a more complete picture. William Clark was probably too old to be an apprentice with Benjamin Wyles: perhaps he was just a gifted amateur who was good enough to meet Wyles's high standards and so could 'indulge' himself in the work of the studio.

    There are certainly quite a number of examples of Clark's work around - perhaps he worked as an agent for part of the week and as a photographer the rest. Some of the examples of Clark & Holden's work mentioned in the TNA catalogue is certainly rather whimsical and obviously wasn't all done for money.

  5. #15
    malcolm99
    Guest

    Default

    Very late in the day I've just discovered that there is a rather active North Meols (Southport) FHS who may be able to help. They also have a Forum where queries can be posted: https://www.
    nmfhssouthport.co.uk/index.php?f=data_home&a=0
    Last edited by Jan1954; 19-11-2011 at 6:28 PM. Reason: They have items for sale

  6. #16
    lizone
    Guest

    Default

    Thanks Coromandel and Malcolm!

    Post #5 - the fact that Southport was in North Meols had thrown my search.
    Post #6 - could the fact that Charles W Clark was baptised at Walton on the Hill in 1885 mean that by that date William Clark had finished at Nevill Street?
    Post #7 - slightly off my topic, but perhaps useful to others, could William Holden and Charles Holden be brothers (father noted as the wonderfully named William Archimedes Holden)?
    Post #11 - I had assumed incorrectly that the Clarks would have been 'living above the shop', but this explanation makes sense.

    Looking at the photo again, the text is difficult to read but I have to admit it is actually '16 Nevill Street' - hope that hasn't been too much of a red herring.

    I feel I should try to post the photo now for you to see ....

    Liz

  7. #17
    malcolm99
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lizone View Post
    I feel I should try to post the photo now for you to see ....
    That's the spirit Liz!

  8. #18
    lizone
    Guest

  9. #19
    Coromandel
    Guest

    Default

    What a lovely clear photo! Thank you for posting it. I'm no great expert on costume so can only point you to some useful websites. In case you don't already know about Roger Vaughan's guide to dating cartes de visite, have a look here:

    https://www.
    cartes.freeuk.com/time/date.htm

    For women's hairstyles of the 1870s and 1880s, see

    https://
    demodecouture.com/hair/hair_natural.html

    and the two linked pages.

    Looking at the history of the 'patent chromotype' itself, the earliest reference to that phrase in the 19th Century British Library Newspapers collection is June 1876 and the latest is March 1880. There don't seem to be very many different advertisements in this period, though, so this probably only represents a few individual photographers.

    The mid-1870s does seem to be a reasonable guess at when this new technology came on the scene. Google Books provides a tantalising snippet from the [i]Journal of Photography[i] for 1877:

    Now, among the novelties of the last year or so the really very beautiful pictures called "chromotype" occupy, perhaps, the first rank; and though I did not intend to give up silver printing just yet, I find that if I do not somebody else will get the best part of my business - my neighbours coming out so strongly with their patent chromotype I determined not to be left any longer in the background. Accordingly I resolved to adopt the process ...


    The latest date for the photo, based on the evidence from the Clark children's ages/birthplaces etc., would be around 1884/5. After that the family seem to have moved away from Southport.

    So based on the technology and the family history we're looking at between c.1875 and c.1885. Perhaps the fashion experts will be able to narrow it down a bit more!

  10. #20
    malcolm99
    Guest

    Default

    That is a really good photo Liz.

    It's interesting that William has his own 'logo' which seems to imply that he did have his own business (albeit he may have shared premises with Wyles and/or Holden).

    It might sound a daft question, but is there any printing (of any sort) on the reverse of the card?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: