State of the art wedding photography circa 1950-55?

[jay moussy]

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!

 

[AgX]

You are speaking of the USA I guess. In other parts of the world there likely was no extended photo coverage, if there was a photographer at location at all.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Beyond 8x10s in an album, I also have contacted 4x5 "proofs" from my late parents' 1952 wedding. The small prints are in a 25-sheet box that contained Kodak Super Panchro-Press, Type B film, which was undoubtedly exposed with a Speed Graphic, using illumination provided by large flashbulbs. All this established via evidence currently available and not first-hand observation, since I wasn't born yet at that time.

 

[jay moussy]

@AgX yes in the US.
Weddings in 1920s French modest families I know of had one main group photo, and the wedding couple. That was it.

@Sal Santamaura, spouse was at the wedding, but she was 4 at the time, didn't look at the photo equipment with much care!

I have an email out to the current owner of the photo family business, asking about the period equipment.
That could actually be a business idea: have your wedding photos done on vintage equipment!

 

[grahamp]

Well, 1950-55 rules out the Mamiya C, the great mid-20thC. wedding standby!

 

[BAC1967]

Looks like a Crown Graphic to me. Location was Edmonds, WA. I found this in a roll of 35mm film from the photographers estate.

Photography by Elwin D. Scheyer by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

 

[Dennis-B]

By the time I was ten, and able to behave reasonably well, I attended a lot of weddings at our church. At the time, I remember the photographers using Graflex type press cameras. Most used the large press-type flashbulbs. There were, by the early sixties, photographers using TLR's (have no idea of the brand). I just remembered the photographer's looking down into the viewfinder.

I ran across a number of old prints and negatives at photo collector's shows, and most of the negatives have been either 4x5, and a few as 3.25x4.25.

As a note, a lot of the weddings we attended in the 1950's and 60's didn't have an "official" photographer. Either "Uncle John" or "Aunt Millie" were there with a folder of some type and did the honors.

I remember seeing the first Koni Omega's Rapid used ca. 1966.

 

[railwayman3]

I recall that my Grandfather always told me that, due to wartime shortages of film, the photographer at his wedding in 1942 was allowed one 120 film of 12 exposures. I did post similar information some time ago, and it was queried that a photographer at that time would have used a Rollei or similar, rather than larger format....a fair point, but my Grandfather was quite a keen photographer himself, knew the local pro photographer in town, and I don't think that he would get this wrong . IDK? It may have been that the photographer had to use whatever was available at any one time ? (The surviving half-dozen pictures are all outdoors and don't appear to have used flash .)

 

[Dennis-B]

I recall that my Grandfather always told me that, due to wartime shortages of film, the photographer at his wedding in 1942 was allowed one 120 film of 12 exposures. I did post similar information some time ago, and it was queried that a photographer at that time would have used a Rollei or similar, rather than larger format....a fair point, but my Grandfather was quite a keen photographer himself, knew the local pro photographer in town, and I don't think that he would get this wrong . IDK? It may have been that the photographer had to use whatever was available at any one time ? (The surviving half-dozen pictures are all outdoors and don't appear to have used flash .)

Part of the film shortage was due to the silver it took for emulsions and developing, and as you mentioned the war needs for all types of film.

Another commodity gold, didn't have the same restrictions, although it was needed for electronics, etc. The fountain pens made in WWII mostly had gold nibs (14k). Steel was available, but in short supply for obvious reasons. I've collected pens for a number of years, and every pen I've encountered produced in the 40's had a gold nib.

 

[MattKing]

We had a longtime family friend who operated a wedding and portrait studio in Vancouver (Artona Studios) for decades. In the early 1970s I remember him referring to the RB67 and Koni-Omega pair that he had transitioned to as his new, small cameras.
I think he had previously used Speed Graphics for candids and in the church and a stand mounted view camera (in the studio) for formals.

 

[cowanw]

Brides went to the studio then or had a group shot in front of the church.
here's a brides of Karsh.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/sets/72157656887307774
https://www.vintag.es/2017/05/yousuf-karsh-wedding-photography-44.html
Here's his camera
https://loredanacrupi.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/yousuf-karsh-bef-aft.jpg

 

[GRHazelton]

Joe, my best friend ever, and I shot weddings in the late 60s and early 70s. We shot the bridal portrait with a 4x5 Speed Graphic, and shot the wedding with a Minolta 102, IIRC, and my Practica LTL. (when we acquired a Mamiya 645 kit we thought we'd died and gone to heaven!) We had the film, Vericolor Professional, processed by a local pro lab, and did the printing ourselves, using a Omega B22 with a color head. Joe was a wizard printer.
The bride and her mother were furnished with proofs, probably 4x5 from which she selected shots to be printed larger. There was a set fee for the bridal portrait and the wedding shots; plus extra for added prints. We set our pricing to be competitive with other services, but never tried to undercut them. IIRC Joe and I kept ownership of the negatives. Where they are now I don't know.
Joe and I also shot sports events, especially high school wresting tournaments; and some product shots. The wrestling tourneys which lasted two or three days we shot in BW so that we could have proofs available the next evening. Pretty rough on two guys with regular day jobs! We never could quit our day jobs since we'd then lose our health insurance. Do note that this was all more than forty years ago. From what I hear now wedding photography is a hellish way to attempt to make a living.
In Richmond, Va at this time Wendell Powell was The Man for wedding pictures. I should know, he shot my first marriage in 1967. Really high quality, traditional coverage. Joe and I did, however, catch a guest falling into a lily pond at an outdoor ceremony! I can't imagine Powell studios being ready for that back in the day!!

 

[Ariston]

Brides went to the studio then or had a group shot in front of the church.
here's a brides of Karsh.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/sets/72157656887307774
https://www.vintag.es/2017/05/yousuf-karsh-wedding-photography-44.html
Here's his camera
https://loredanacrupi.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/yousuf-karsh-bef-aft.jpg

I find it interesting that a lot of the brides in the second link appear to be standing on stools. They look weirdly long to me, but it must have been the style back then.

 

[cowanw]

There was maybe back tilt to keep the train and the eyes in focus, which would make the train more imposing.

 

[AndyH]

Part of the film shortage was due to the silver it took for emulsions and developing, and as you mentioned the war needs for all types of film.

Another commodity gold, didn't have the same restrictions, although it was needed for electronics, etc. The fountain pens made in WWII mostly had gold nibs (14k). Steel was available, but in short supply for obvious reasons. I've collected pens for a number of years, and every pen I've encountered produced in the 40's had a gold nib.

As a fellow collector of vintage pens, I always wondered about this as well. The answer, according to a "pen friend" of great expertise, whom you might also know, is that the quantities involved were so small that there was never a full fledged shortage that endangered production, and that civilian authorities didn't think most people would be willing to turn in their fountain pens, grandma's wedding ring, and other valuable small items for the relatively small sums of money involved for such lightweight items. Parker and Sheaffer both had large stocks of gold in inventory, having bought up the commodity during the worst years of the depression, and they never had to go to the open market to purchase gold for nibs or for gold-filled cases. As I recall, there were few, if any, solid gold barrels and caps produced by any maker during the war.

Sound about right?
Andy

 

[Dennis-B]

As a fellow collector of vintage pens, I always wondered about this as well. The answer, according to a "pen friend" of great expertise, whom you might also know, is that the quantities involved were so small that there was never a full fledged shortage that endangered production, and that civilian authorities didn't think most people would be willing to turn in their fountain pens, grandma's wedding ring, and other valuable small items for the relatively small sums of money involved for such lightweight items. Parker and Sheaffer both had large stocks of gold in inventory, having bought up the commodity during the worst years of the depression, and they never had to go to the open market to purchase gold for nibs or for gold-filled cases. As I recall, there were few, if any, solid gold barrels and caps produced by any maker during the war.

Sound about right?
Andy

Very much so. Gold was in demand for certain electrical and electronic applications, but those amounts were very small compared to the supply on hand. And the U.S. was still mining gold silver; not like the platinum group metals which were mined in the USSR and South Africa, geographical supply difficulties. While a lot of folks turned in their old pots and pans, gold was more likely to turn up in a pawn shop.

As an aside, I've run across dozens of fountain pens in estate and garage sales, missing the 14k gold nibs. It seems that the price of gold got high enough in the 80's and 90's to persuade folks to pull the nibs and sell the gold for its melt down value.

 

[AndyH]

As an aside, I've run across dozens of fountain pens in estate and garage sales, missing the 14k gold nibs. It seems that the price of gold got high enough in the 80's and 90's to persuade folks to pull the nibs and sell the gold for its melt down value.

I’ve seen those, too. But even at peak prices, I’ll bet most who pulled and melted their nibs were severely disappointed. What a shame.

 

[Ray Morgenweck]

My folks were married in 1950 and their wedding photos were color prints. All I’ve seen are faded into a yellowish cast.

 

[bsdunek]

From the 50's, I remember 4X5 Press cameras. My cousin, in the later 50's changed to a Rolleiflex, and then by 1959, a Hassleblad 1600, which he did my wedding with. I remember the 1600 Hassy had a focal plane shutter in the body and a leaf shutter in the lens. That was so shutterless lenses could be used. He also used a big Hieland electronic flash with a big battery on a shoulder strap. His photos were always great.

 

[CMoore]

Huh....... lots of 4x5 being mentioned.
I would have guessed 6x7.

 

[voceumana]

I suspect the Simmon Omega 120 was the first 6x7 camera, though I am not at all certain. That camera was introduced in 1954--it probably took a while to gain popularity. 6x9 was a more common format in the 1950's. By the mid 1960's the 6x7 format had become popular for pro photography.

 

[CMoore]

I suspect the Simmon Omega 120 was the first 6x7 camera, though I am not at all certain. That camera was introduced in 1954--it probably took a while to gain popularity. 6x9 was a more common format in the 1950's. By the mid 1960's the 6x7 format had become popular for pro photography.

Ah...OK.
I did not realize it was that "recent" of a size.

 

[Paul Howell]

While in high school I worked part time for a photographer who was a retired Navy Photo Mate. He did a lot of weddings, by the mid 60s he shooting with a Kodak Metalist and a 4X5 or 2X3 press camera. I recall him telling me that in late 50s when he retired he only used 4X5, as film quality improved he was able to move to smaller formats. He had the 2X3 tricked out a 135mm lens with a matched cam for head shots. The last time I saw him the early 70s he using a Mamiya with 3 lens.

 

[MattKing]

I suspect the Simmon Omega 120 was the first 6x7 camera, though I am not at all certain. That camera was introduced in 1954--it probably took a while to gain popularity. 6x9 was a more common format in the 1950's. By the mid 1960's the 6x7 format had become popular for pro photography.

Ah...OK.
I did not realize it was that "recent" of a size.

It was probably the North American wedding market that motivated the adoption of 2.25" x 2.75" (6x7) format as a popular choice.
When the market moved from 4" x 5" to roll film, the choices were 6x6 (square) and 6x9 (2:3 rectangle), but the labs were set up to print to a 4:5 aspect ratio.
I shot almost all of my weddings (beginning in the 1970s) on 6x6, but all my album prints and almost all of my extra enlargement sales were 4" x 5", 5" x 7" or 8" x 10".
I attached almost every one of the corresponding negatives to cardboard masks that my lab supplied, and their machine printers were set up for.
A 6x7 negative would have meant a lot less masking and cropping.

 

[CMoore]

10-4... Interesting... Thank You