You’ve seen them. Those stiff, unblinking faces staring out from a silver-toned surface. Maybe they’re in a cardboard box at a garage sale or tucked inside a velvet-lined album your grandmother keeps in the attic. There’s something eerie about old photographs of people. It’s the eyes, mostly. Because the exposure times back in the 1840s were so long—sometimes several minutes—people couldn't just "say cheese." They had to hold perfectly still, often with their heads clamped into metal braces hidden behind their chairs.
That’s why they look so ghostly.
We tend to think of these people as formal, cold, or even miserable. But honestly? They were just like us. They were just trying not to blink. When you look at old photographs of people, you aren't just looking at history; you’re looking at the first time in human existence that a single moment was frozen forever. Before the daguerreotype, if you wanted to see a face, you needed a painter or a very good memory. Suddenly, with the advent of Louis Daguerre’s process in 1839, the average person could "stop" time. It changed how we grieve, how we remember, and how we see ourselves.
The Daguerreotype and the Myth of the "Grumpy" Ancestor
One of the biggest misconceptions about old photographs of people is that they never smiled because they had bad teeth. That’s mostly a myth. While 19th-century dental hygiene wasn’t exactly up to modern standards, people with missing teeth were common and it didn't carry the same social stigma it does now. The real reason for the stern faces was practical.
Try holding a smile for three minutes. Your face starts to twitch. Your muscles ache. It looks fake.
Early photographers like Matthew Brady, who is famous for his Civil War portraits, encouraged a "serious" expression because it was easier to maintain. But if you dig through the archives of the Library of Congress, you’ll find exceptions. There are rare gems—candid-style shots where someone cracked a joke and the camera caught a blurry, joyful mess. These "mistakes" are actually the most human images we have. They remind us that the Victorian era wasn't just black crepe and mourning jewelry; it was full of people who laughed until they cried, even if the technology of the time couldn't quite keep up with their speed.
Post-Mortem Photography: It’s Not as Macabre as You Think
We have to talk about the elephant in the room. Or rather, the body in the parlor.
✨ Don't miss: How to Sign Someone Up for Scientology: What Actually Happens and What You Need to Know
Post-mortem photography—the practice of taking old photographs of people after they had passed away—seems horrifying to a modern audience. We see these images on "creepy" subreddits or Pinterest boards labeled as "oddities." But if you want to understand the 19th century, you have to look at this through the lens of grief, not horror.
In the mid-1800s, childhood mortality was staggering. Often, a family wouldn't have a single image of their child while they were alive because photography was expensive and required a trip to a studio. When a loved one died, the "memento mori" photograph was the only way to keep their likeness. Experts like Stanley B. Burns, who curated one of the largest collections of these images in Sleeping Beauty: Memorial Photography in America, point out that these were cherished heirlooms. They weren't meant to be scary. They were a way to say, "You were here. You mattered."
Sometimes the photographer would even paint pink onto the cheeks of the deceased in the final print to make them look "asleep." It was a desperate, beautiful attempt to deny the finality of death.
The Chemistry of Memory: Tintypes and Ambryotypes
By the 1850s and 60s, the daguerreotype was being replaced by cheaper, faster methods. Enter the tintype. These weren't actually made of tin—they were thin sheets of iron coated with dark lacquer. Because they were durable and cheap, soldiers during the Civil War absolutely loved them. A young private could get his picture taken in a camp, slip the metal plate into an envelope, and mail it home to his mother for a few cents.
These old photographs of people were the first "instant" photos.
Then you had ambryotypes, which were glass negatives backed with black material to create a positive image. If you find one today and the black backing has flaked off, the person looks like a ghost. It’s a literal fading of the past. These weren't just art pieces; they were physical objects that people carried in their pockets. They have scratches. They have thumbprints. They have DNA on them from people who have been gone for 150 years.
🔗 Read more: Wire brush for cleaning: What most people get wrong about choosing the right bristles
Spotting the Real Deal: How to Tell if an Image is Authentic
If you’re starting a collection or just going through family bins, you need to know what you’re looking at. Modern "sepia" filters have made everyone think all old photos are brown. They aren't.
- Daguerreotypes: These look like mirrors. You have to tilt them at an angle to see the image. If it’s on a highly reflective silver surface, it’s a daguerreotype. These are the "Holy Grail" for collectors.
- Tintypes: They are magnetic. If a small magnet sticks to the "photo," it’s a tintype. They usually look a bit dark and muddy.
- Cartes de Visite (CdV): These are small, paper-based photos mounted on heavy cardstock, roughly the size of a modern business card. These were the "social media" of the 1860s. People would trade them like Pokemon cards.
A common mistake people make is assuming every photo in a wooden case is a daguerreotype. It's not. Tintypes and ambryotypes were also put in cases to protect them. You have to look at the material itself. Is it glass? Metal? Paper?
The Digital Preservation Crisis
Ironically, the old photographs of people from 1890 might outlive the digital photos you took on your iPhone last week.
Silver halides on a copper plate or paper are stable if kept in a cool, dry place. Digital files? They're fragile. Bit rot is real. Hard drives fail. Cloud accounts get locked. If you don't print your photos, they essentially don't exist in the long term. Historians are already worried about the "Digital Dark Age"—a gap in the human record where we have millions of images but no way to read the formats they were saved in.
There is something visceral about holding a physical print. You can feel the weight of the history. When you look at old photographs of people, you’re engaging in a form of time travel that no VR headset can replicate. You are seeing exactly what the light saw in that room, on that day, over a century ago.
Identifying the "Unknown" Faces
The tragedy of most old photographs of people is the lack of labels. We have millions of "Unidentified Man" or "Woman with Lace Collar" images floating around. But there is hope.
💡 You might also like: Images of Thanksgiving Holiday: What Most People Get Wrong
Crowdsourced databases and AI facial recognition are starting to reconnect names with faces. Projects like Civil War Photo Sleuth use advanced algorithms to compare unidentified tintypes with known portraits of soldiers. They look at the shape of the ears, the distance between the eyes, and uniform insignia to give these men back their names.
If you have old photos, for the love of everything, write on the back of them. Use a soft pencil (ink can bleed through and ruin the image). Don't just write "Grandma." Write "Mary Elizabeth Smith, age 24, Topeka, 1912." Your descendants will thank you.
Taking Action: How to Save Your Own History
If you’ve inherited a collection of old photographs of people, don't just leave them in the basement. Dampness is the enemy. Humidity causes the emulsion to soften, which leads to mold or the photo sticking to the glass.
- Get them out of magnetic albums. You know those 1970s albums with the "sticky" pages and plastic overlays? They are acid traps. They will eat your photos. Carefully peel them out. If they’re stuck, use a piece of dental floss to gently "saw" between the photo and the page.
- Store them in acid-free sleeves. Look for products that have passed the Photographic Activity Test (PAT).
- Scan at high resolution. Don't just take a photo of the photo with your phone. Use a flatbed scanner at 600 DPI or higher. This allows you to blow up the image and see details you never noticed—like the ring on a finger or a newspaper headline in the background.
- Handle by the edges. The oils on your skin are surprisingly acidic. Over time, your fingerprints can actually etch themselves into the surface of an old print.
The value of these images isn't usually in the money. Unless you have a signed portrait of a famous figure or a rare shot of a historical event, most old photographs of people sell for a few dollars at antique malls. The real value is the connection. It’s the realization that 150 years ago, someone stood in front of a lens, nervous and sweating, wanting to be remembered.
By looking at them, you’re fulfilling that wish.
Start by organizing your smallest box of photos this weekend. Pick five images, scan them, and share them with a family member who hasn't seen them. You'll be surprised how much a single face from 1900 can spark a conversation in 2026. Keep the physical prints in a dark, cool place—ideally a metal box or acid-free archival container—and keep them away from sunlight, which bleaches the history right off the paper. Once they're gone, that window into the past shuts forever. Don't let the latch fall.