Here is a pic of the real girls. L-R Carrie, Mary, Laura taken in De smet, South Dakota 1881

and Grace Pearl



http://vvv.com/~jenslegg/babygrac.jpg

I get a chance to see wht the girls looked like back then. The one thing I don't like about old pics from the 1800's is that everybody looks so unhappy or preoccupied. Bea Arthur still takes photos like that.

Originally posted by ThomasE
I get a chance to see wht the girls looked like back then. The one thing I don't like about old pics from the 1800's is that everybody looks so unhappy or preoccupied. Bea Arthur still takes photos like that.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Here are Laura and Almanzo shortly after their marriage.

Charles and Caroline's wedding picture. Sorry, it is a little fuzzy.

I could do without Pa's beard. I know that's the way they were, but the triangle effect is a little much...

Originally posted by jayman75
I could do without Pa's beard. I know that's the way they were, but the triangle effect is a little much... :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW, the Bea Arthur comment was not an insult. LOL. She just takes poses as though she was in the 1800's. Goodness. No one has smiled in these pics, not even baby Grace. LOL.

Originally posted by ThomasE
:lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW, the Bea Arthur comment was not an insult. LOL. She just takes poses as though she was in the 1800's. Goodness. No one has smiled in these pics, not even baby Grace. LOL.

I was told that they weren't allowed to smile because with the early cameras every little move or twitch would blur the picture. :(

yeah I've seen those pictures before. They all look so mad and stern. Pa's beard scars me too.

Originally posted by Penny Lane
Here is a pic of the real girls. L-R Carrie, Mary, Laura taken in De smet, South Dakota 1881
Is it just me, or does that picture of Laura kinda look like an older Melissa Gilbert? ...Freaky!:eyes2:

Originally posted by Penny Lane


I was told that they weren't allowed to smile because with the early cameras every little move or twitch would blur the picture. :(

That's true...also, I've heard that the camera exposures were much longer back then, several minutes, as opposed to less than a second now...if you think about it, it would be kind of painful to hold a smile for that long...I've heard that's another reason why people's faces showed no expression in photographs taken in the "olden days". Plus, it might not have occurred to early photographers that (most) people look better when they smile...I'm sure most people were just amazed to even HAVE their picture taken, who cared how they looked? Smiling while having one's picture taken was probably something that evolved over time...

Originally posted by Tweety


That's true...also, I've heard that the camera exposures were much longer back then, several minutes, as opposed to less than a second now...if you think about it, it would be kind of painful to hold a smile for that long...I've heard that's another reason why people's faces showed no expression in photographs taken in the "olden days". Plus, it might not have occurred to early photographers that (most) people look better when they smile...I'm sure most people were just amazed to even HAVE their picture taken, who cared how they looked? Smiling while having one's picture taken was probably something that evolved over time...
I agree, Tweety. They also might have been a little apprehensive at having their pictures taken because some people thought(and some still do today) that cameras captured part of your soul. Maybe that stern look they always have was really just a frozen fear.:cool:

Originally posted by Penny Lane
I was told that they weren't allowed to smile because with the early cameras every little move or twitch would blur the picture. :( That's right for the reasons that others have said. I've been trying to perfect the art of having my picture taken, without smiling, all my life. I've so far been an abysmal failure at it.:) There we go! lol. How's that look?