Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1930's and late 60's to mid 70's. Hard to tell the date without looking at more of the photo. The style of the glasses gives me a general idea but a guess nonetheless.
The photo came from a scan or photo copy from a book. We do not have access to the book. It's been scanned or copied at least 2 times affecting the quality which looks to not have been good when put in the book.
We find two people by the same name. Under that photo was 1918-1975.
If those are the birth and death years of the person pictured, then he was 57 years old.
The other with the same name was a adult member of a church in 1907 born around 1887 or before.
The 1918-1975 may not be birth and death years. We have found errors on such number below a photo. If we assume the 75 is death date and the photo is of the member of the church and born around 1887, then 1887-1975 gets age 88 which is easily an age to which most everyone can live to be.
The photo and last name is all we have.
The photo does not look like it was taken in the 1970's and the man does not look to be age 57 or younger.
If both of those are correct then the church member can not be the one looked for.
Last edited by howard555; 10-04-2016 at 08:14 AM..
The photo does not look like it was taken in the 1970's and the man does not look to be age 57 or younger.
If both of those are correct then the church member can not be the one looked for.
I don't agree, I think it's possible it was from the 1970s and he was 57 or younger. Some people look older than they are, some people look younger. And there is not enough shown to be able to say when the photo was taken - no reason it couldn't be from the 70s. What kind of book is it and when was it published?
Just guessing without reading other posts. That man looks under 65 years old, maybe 60 or so. I say this because his face is still full, not withered or sunken, and even though he has wrinkles on his forehead, his skin isn't badly wrinkled. He still has a full head of hair (although some men always do) and his eyebrows are still dark.
About all we have to go on (since it's just his head and men's hairstyles don't change much) is the glasses. For glasses style I get 1960s probably. Although:
You can type into google--Mens Glasses from the 1930s. or from the 1940s. or from the 1960s. Now I'm thinking it could be the 1930s but we can't really tell because he could have been the type who liked old fashioned or new fangled--we do not know.
My parents wore wire rimless glasses in the '40s and early '50s. Later pictures have them in plastic frames. My 90 yr old grandmother was still wearing rimless glasses in the 70s.
I could be 100% wrong! But I know how it is because I have a few old family pictures that have me totally stumped.
Last edited by in_newengland; 10-10-2016 at 12:22 PM..
Being scanned like that.. If you told me he was one of the people working on the Manhatten Project, i'd buy it.. And I could also buy that he was a hostage in Iran, or a survivor from the Titanic.
Love to see the entire photo for more context. My gut is telling me 50's to 60's, but.. My gut is telling me I need to eat, too.. And it's wrong.
Love to see the entire photo for more context. My gut is telling me 50's to 60's, but...............
This is all that exist as far as photo. It came from a book and we do not have access to the book. The person who says they have the book can not find it. And does not remember the name of the book due to her age and own health issues. She is are not a relative so she knows nothing about the person. We have found another person with the same initials and last name and stretch things a bit to have both of them to be one in the same.
Another photo of another person had the dates wrong under the photo. The same appears to be true for the photo above. 1918-1975 did not sound accurate when looked along side the photo. Age 57.
Family Search dot org has worked for us again. The correct birth date is 1894. That makes the age of the person in the photo to seem more logical than the photo being taken the day before death at age 57.
He lived to be age 81.
We need to visit the library again and locate the search tools on Ancestry for "occupation" and "newspapers."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
