Can you date this very old photo by the clothes fashions?

[Davespecifico]

I’d like an idea, roughly, of the decade.
Thanks

Late 1800 - very early 1900s. Very late Victorian or early Edwardian.

cabinetcardgallery.com/?s=Hellis&submit=Search Similarly dressed couple here.

I have a photo with a man dressed similarly dated 1905

If you look at this website it can help date photos taken by Hellis & Sons by the card they're mounted on. Good luck!

www.cartedevisite.co.uk/2011/08/the-victorian-photo-dating-wizard-incorporates-hellis-sons/

Difficult to be really specific as the lady is mostly behind the plant! But I'd say, going by the pouched front to the bodice, the wide decorated collar and the slight puff to the sleeve caps, late 1890s.

I would say 1880's

Thanks for all you help and useful sources.

The man is my second great grandfather. He was married twice as his first wife died. She died at 38 in 1894. He remarried in 1904. I am descended from his first wife. I’ve been told the photo is of his second wife who would have been 36 ish when she married him.
I just wondered if by any chance the lady in the picture is actually my ancestor.

She's very short-waisted, isn't she? I'm built like that
You can't see her hand to see if she has a wedding ring on.

Did she have children? Would the photo have passed down the other side of the family of this was the ‘other’ wife?

I’m also very short waisted, though I don’t think I’m descended from her.

She and he had 2 sons and this photo is passed down from them, so really it’s most likely not to be my female ancestor, and to be taken around or after his 2nd wedding. Maybe it was taken to mark their wedding?

I was going to guess somewhere around 1903. Earlier if anything. Not very much later at all. Something about her look felt later than 1890s.

This is the same lady, many years later with her son. Same short waist but facially she looks different. Is it just ageing, or does she look like a different lady?

I actually think it’s very very hard to date. There is no really strong marker.

Her hair doesn’t reflect any era, not the puffiness of the Edwardian or the primness of Victorian.

The neckline is quite hard to see, and quite simple. Again high necks or collars are the easiest thing to place as are sleeves. But the sleeves don’t seem to fit into any era in particular.

How long is the skirt in the second picture it’s quite hard to see

I think that’s the same lady. I put the photos side by side.

I would say the 2nd picture is 1930’s? If the skirt length is sort of between ankle and calf

She has a very short neck in the first picture and a very long neck in the second.

@TheEmojiFormerlyKnownAsPrince they look fairly well off. And would ha e had to have been at least middle class to afford a to have a photograph taken.

Going by the dates you give, I think the lady is likely to be his second wife. Getting a photograph taken was a big deal for ordinary folks in the past, and often marked a special event. This could well be a photograph taken after their wedding. Brides of all classes would often choose a fashionable day dress as it could then be worn afterwards on many occasions.

You might pin it down from the dates of the well-known photographers name at the bottom, Hellis and Sons There are photography archives who provide this infor for a fee. Just google Hellis and Sons

I’m not sure if they would have been well off for photos - I have photos of my grandparents and their parents and they weren’t well if at all. It was something people would have dressed up and done for a special occasion or memorial though.

I have a photo of my grandma (end if ww1h as a small child. It must have been after a funeral as she is in a very dark (black she said) dress and she looks wild (she had masses of jet black hair and looks furious). The photo scared me as a child (she looked like a China faced doll). Actually thinking about the dates it may have been after her mums funeral or after the wedding if her dad to her horrible stepmother.

His father had been well off. He had worked with the Cunard family running their business in Canada then returned here to run his own business.
He himself was a clerk, so I don’t think there was inherited wealth.

I think if they were really well off it would have been much easier to date the clothing as it would have been much more fashionable.

@ThatIsNotMyUsername

I’m not sure if they would have been well off for photos - I have photos of my grandparents and their parents and they weren’t well if at all. It was something people would have dressed up and done for a special occasion or memorial though.

I have a photo of my grandma (end if ww1h as a small child. It must have been after a funeral as she is in a very dark (black she said) dress and she looks wild (she had masses of jet black hair and looks furious). The photo scared me as a child (she looked like a China faced doll). Actually thinking about the dates it may have been after her mums funeral or after the wedding if her dad to her horrible stepmother.

Yes, I've got a few photos of my family from around this time and they were miners and factory workers. I don't any have photos of the branch of my family who were farm labourers so perhaps it was more common for urban working class people.

This is a fascinating thread, I wouldn't have the first idea how to date a photo from the fashions. It's really interesting the clues posters are picking up from the clothes, decor etc.

Thanks all for all info.