State of the art wedding photography circa 1950-55?

[Luckless]

I've found that a lot of "History of Photography" books or articles leave some rather wide gaps on details of industry practice over the years. It is easy enough to find info of "This film type and format of film was on the market, as were these cameras during those specific years", but it is difficult to read much in what was actually being used at any given time, and how materials were being used...

I sometimes find content that includes hints based on things like volume of film sales, or excellent accounts of local practice from first hand experience somewhere, but drawing many conclusions from limited data points seems sketchy...

After all, what a photographer in Halifax NS was doing in 1950 doesn't say a great deal about what everyone else in the industry was doing at that time.

And for something like wedding photography we also have to consider different market levels, and how things scale across the industry. By 1950s was there as anywhere near as much 'industry depth' with different price points and service levels as we see today? Something that compares to the difference between 'the guy who bought a camera...' lowest market price vs 'we'll bring three experienced professional photographers and a half dozen aids lugging lights and stuff for us...'?

 

[BAC1967]

The American Annual of Photography is a good resource for what was going on at a particular time. You can find them for sale on eBay all the time. It was published from 1887 to 1953.

https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000526367

 

[AgX]

I've found that a lot of "History of Photography" books or articles leave some rather wide gaps on details of industry practice over the years. It is easy enough to find info of "This film type and format of film was on the market, as were these cameras during those specific years", but it is difficult to read much in what was actually being used at any given time, and how materials were being used...

Yes. I myself had a lot of discussions of what was used camerawise in the past. A good source of information are textbooks and educational films from those years, as they likely depict what the authors considered standard of their time. Another source are newspapers, newsreels showing photographers at work.
Also consider (with a lot of grains of salt...) our own thread "Old cameras in Old movies".)

And... do not overlook different schools/fashions between countries.
The most extreme opposition is Leica-type cameras and Rolleiflexes common/standard since the 30s in Germany whereas US press photographers were clinging to the Graflexes to the 60s.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

A question, arising from looking at an extended family wedding photo album from 1954:

-- what was the likely photo equipment used back then, by an upmarket photo business (still going, Bachrach Photo, Boston, since 1868)?

-- would the same setup be used for formal ceremony, and tighter diner pictures?

The darkroom retouching questions would take a whole new post so let's ignore it!

Jay, While I was born in December, 1954, but my first 'wedding photography' occurred at 11 years old in 1966 (well, OK ... it was a group photo .. and I'm not saying it was very good, either!). The point is, by that time I knew --and had learned from-- a a couple photographers who were of course still using their equipment from "the early days" (a few years before!). My own, true 'hard core' wedding photography experience began in about 1969, after my mom bought me a Japanese Rolleicord clone: a Yashica Model A. Anyway, not much of it had changed by that time, so, regarding Northern California during that era, With that in mind I submit, in answer to your question:

Cameras: Speed Graphic and Rolleiflex cameras (possibly Crown Graphic too)
Film: Kodak Ektacolor-S
Lighting: GE "Sure-fire" M5 and M5-B flash bulbs or maybe larger) in Heiland, Kalart and Graflex flash units (the "star wars" handles). The flash bulb base was usually licked before inserting it into the socket. This assured good contact and helped to avoid failed flashes.
Lighting diffusion: A (clean!) handkerchief with a rubber-band to hold it onto the reflector
PC cords: Paramount (still exists)
Camera Case: Typically, a hard, black or brown "boxy" type (often leather or shiny leatherette) with multiple external pockets, a faulty "lock" and uncomfortable strap that converted the photographer into a hunchback.
Albums: TAP-LOOMIS (same as today!)


NOTE:
The electronic Graflex Stroboflash and Honeywell-Heiland Strobonar flash units were soon to follow in popular, in the early to mid-1960s until well into the 1970s, as was the Koni-Omega (which evolved into the non-Konica lens "Rapid-Omega") cameras. While 4x5 dropped off in use, the Rolleiflex continued, too (the Rolleiwide was the Rolls-Royce in the early 1970s), well into nearly the digital age . . .

This is as accurate as my memory allows. Hope this is helpful.

Best,

Christopher
PS: The late Frank Denevi, for whom I often worked as a camera salesman and store manager, was an excellent wedding and portrait photographer in the 1950S. His family still has a lot of his negatives from the 1950s. At one point I begged Frank to publish a book of these absolutely spectacular (if, by today's standards, a bit kitchy) wedding photos which, in my opinion, are valuable not only from a photographic standpoint, but as a social document. If you're familiar with Bill Owens' * book, "Suburbia", think of Denevi's work as a color version! Amazing stuff.

*sideline name-dropping: When I worked at Denevi Camera in the early 1970s, I actually sold film to Bill Owens, who was working on his book at the time while working as a news photographer for a Livermore paper, I believe. Touch me, I'm famous.

 

[pentaxuser]

Just a piece of social commentary on my part but we Europeans may as well not even try and comment on the state of wedding photography in the U.S. In the early to mid 50s and beyond, the scarcity of goods and general deprivation which affected most of Europe was hardly felt in the U.S.

So what we experienced bore no relationship to what our counterparts in the U.S. experienced. The chasm in standard of living which affected everything including photography was massive.

pentaxuser

 

[jay moussy]

Thanks Christopher and other posters!

What pentaxuser wrote is on point. I think the wartime rationing in the U.S. was nowhere near what went on in Europe. One can look at the European post-war motor industry to see how most everything was built to be as economic as possible (British three-wheelers, Italian, French econo-cars, etc.)

Related: Specifics about my initial post:
The father of "my" groom came over from England, by himself, as a pennyless teen in 1907, and went on to develop a very successful wool trading business (wars high demand?).
He lived the high life of the day, hence the use of a top-tier photo studio (Bachrach).

 

[Hunter_Compton]

If I'm not mistaken, the National Graflex was the first camera to shoot in 6x7 format on 120 film. It was introduced in 1934. It wasn't a popular seller though, so I can see why it would not be associated with such.