Reply
Thu 1 Nov, 2007 10:00 pm
My friend claims to have an original tintype of Joseph Smith (of Mormon fame). Timewise, is this possible, and if so, what would it be worth?
Joseph Smith (1805-1844), was just the sort of person who might have been the subject of an early photograph. The problem is that tintypes didn't come into fashion until after 1853, almost a decade after Smith's murder in Navoo.
Perhaps the image isn't a tintype, but some other early photographic method. I doubt it, but it might be just inside the realm of possibility. What is the provenance of the image? Why is it that the subject is thought to be Joseph Smith?
As to the second question as to the items value, probably not very much.
Re: Joseph Smith Tintype
TexasEm wrote:My friend claims to have an original tintype of Joseph Smith (of Mormon fame). Timewise, is this possible, and if so, what would it be worth?
There is only one known photograph (daguerreotype) of Joseph Smith, and even that is somewhat doubtful. If your friend truly has an authentic photo of Joseph Smith, its worth would be considerable.
Just remember that it is highly unlikely that the item really is Joseph Smith. To be worth a lot of money, you must have excellent provenance. Without the provenance, early daguerreotypes can be found for under $500 in many antique stores.
The existing dagguereotype of Smith is being scrutinized since it has had so many "post photo" touches. If it were an early heliotype or daggueretype it would be extremely valuable. The subject matter dictates the value. While a run-of the mill dagguereotype can be worth a few hundred bucks, a photo of Walt WHitman went for over 150000 at auction. Historical figures are all sought by advanced collectors and museums.
Have it appraised by someone reputable in early photography. We cant give any worthwhile advice. Also remember, condition, condition, condition.
@TexasEm,
Would love to talk to your friend about picture, I have been doing research on photographs of Joseph Smith. Please email me at
[email protected]
Thanks,