Discovery of Photograph of Joseph Smith?

[InCognitus]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

”Discussions I’ve been privy to have indicated that the death mask may have accentuated Joseph and Hyrum’s features. Their bodies were exposed to hot, humid, summer air for 24 hours before the masks were created; this could have caused the extremities (including eyes, nose, and lips) to become bloated.

The above comments seem to be at odds with the following in your more recent post:

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

Mention should be made here about the reliability of Joseph’s death mask, because some doubt it is an accurate representation of his face in life. Specifically, some claim that the violent events of his death created facial fractures which distorted his lower face, making the mask elongated compared to his actual face in life.22 However, the accuracy of the proportions of his mask to his face in life can be easily demonstrated. On June 25, 1842, Joseph sat for profile artist Sutcliffe Maudsley, who traced the profiles of his subjects in order to produce his artwork.23 Comparisons of the mask to Maudsley’s drawings reveal a near-exact profile match: the forehead, nose, lips and chin all align very closely (Fig. 2). The only reasonable explanation for the close- ness of this match is that both Maudsley’s drawings and the death masks were derived from Joseph’s natural, undistorted head.”

 

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

The above comments seem to be at odds with the following in your more recent post:

 

Yep, though even a little difference from the side might look quite a bit larger from the front if it spread more.  And the slight difference in lips to appear a bit fuller, I would be interested in experimenting somehow to see if the difference we see is within possibility of looking almost identical from the side.

 Just putting up what I am coming across. I want to see their overlays myself. 
 

The death mask eyes always looked overly large to me.  
 

 

Edited July 23, 2022 by Calm

[Zosimus]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

 Just putting up what I am coming across. I want to see their overlays myself. 

I'm far from a photoshop pro, but a quick attempt at an overlay (mask flipped with 60% opacity so the eyes can shine through) has me leaning to convinced

 

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

I'm far from a photoshop pro, but a quick attempt at an overlay (mask flipped with 60% opacity so the eyes can shine through) has me leaning to convinced

 

Nice. 

[Calm]

It is possible the lighting is making the death mask nose look more bulbous than it is or his face less in the daguerreotype as the lighting on the original masks in this photo makes it look less.

https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/museum/museum-treasures-joseph-and-hyrum-death-masks?lang=eng

[Tacenda]

deleted

Edited December 5, 2024 by Tacenda

[Calm]

Found this comparing Chopin’s death mask to pictures and drawings (I don’t know if this is the mask that is slightly idealized or the one untouched though…)

 

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, pogi said:

No, Scotsmen suck at art (just joking, in case you can’t see that either).

 

This really has you triggered. 
 

Is there any topic so innocuous that being contradicted regarding it won’t set you off? 

[Calm]

34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Jeffrey Epstein, maybe that's why I didn't like it. 

A lot?  Not to me.  There is an actor from eons ago that I am trying to track down he looks more like to me.  Maybe this guy, but the more I look at him, no…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grant_Goodeve

But my daughter says no…but not Epstein, that is wishful thinking imo. (She says no for Epstein as well, didn’t know who he was though he looked familiar.)

Both she and I are having déjà vu feelings with Joseph’s picture, but I don’t think it is because it reminds me of the paintings or death mask…my mind is going elsewhere (old tv westerns).

Added…I think I have the guy’s face, just got to remember what he was in…he was a guest for a lot of series, but I am pretty sure he had one of his own, he was blond though…blast, lost it again…

Edited July 23, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

31 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

This really has you triggered. 
 

Is there any topic so innocuous that being contradicted regarding it won’t set you off? 

Or maybe he is just bored and passing time…you and others are inflating reactions imo, never makes sense to me why people do this…and bluntly, it is annoying.

Why is it so important to paint the other one as emotional?

Edited July 23, 2022 by Calm

[Tacenda]

This happened tonight, should be interesting. I thought we'd have to wait to hear the full story after the Smith reunion.

C/P'd the introduction:

Steven Pynakker is joined by John Hamer and Lachlan MacKay to discuss the newly discovered photo that may very well be of Joseph Smith! On this very special episode of Mormon Book Reviews the history and provenance of the photo is discussed. Lachlan was involved early on when the photo was first uncovered. He describes how they were able to keep the discovery from being leaked and the very techniques used to identify the photo. I want to thank John Hamer for helping facilitate this wonderful and groundbreaking conversation.

 

 

[Calm]

Good find, Tacenda.

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

Good find, Tacenda.

Thanks, showed up on Youtube.

[Mike7110]

Found good info from this source:

 

The Visual Image of Joseph Smith, Masters thesis by William B. McCarl, 1962, BYU
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5922&context=etd

 

The painting might not have been by David Rogers, in fact, the painting might have been made from the daguerreotype instead of from Joseph Smith sitting for the painting. The 1962 research seems highly applicable and valuable here.

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, Mike7110 said:

Found good info from this source:

 

The Visual Image of Joseph Smith, Masters thesis by William B. McCarl, 1962, BYU
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5922&context=etd

 

The painting might not have been by David Rogers, in fact, the painting might have been made from the daguerreotype instead of from Joseph Smith sitting for the painting. The 1962 research seems highly applicable and valuable here.

I read most of this research and skimmed through and then got to the end, pages 75 and 76 which pretty much correlate to the finding of the actual photo of Joseph Smith. This gives me a reason to believe that this is a true photo. Thanks so much for the link. I'm convinced.

[pogi]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

This really has you triggered. 
 

Is there any topic so innocuous that being contradicted regarding it won’t set you off? 

Not sure where you are coming from with your accusations.  You seem to be really pulling out the artillery in a rather innocent exchange of perspective.  First your Scotsman comment, and now this?  

Clearly I was allowing space for your perspective while engaging in what I thought was obvious hyperbole to emphasize how much I personally perceive the likeness. I am also commenting on my genuine curiosity at the phenomenon of perspective - how I could clearly and plainly see something that you can’t. I find it fascinating.

I am not engaging in fallacies to win an argument (clearly this is a subjective matter with no absolutely right answer), nor am I overly emotional.  This just highlights yet again how radically different perspectives can be when viewing the same things. 
 

Edited July 23, 2022 by pogi

[halconero]

From reddit, the 1842 painting of Emma Hale Smith vs. the 1845 daguerreotype.

There’s little reason to demand exactitude between the proposed daguerreotype of Joseph Smith and his painting.

 

Also remember when overlaying the death mask on the daguerreotype that you need to horizontally reverse the latter first.

Edited July 23, 2022 by halconero

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

This just highlights yet again how radically different perspectives can be when viewing the same things. 

 

So much for the Correspondence Theory of Truth.

Seriously 

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, halconero said:

From reddit, the 1842 painting of Emma Hale Smith vs. the 1845 daguerreotype.

There’s little reason to demand exactitude between the proposed daguerreotype of Joseph Smith and his painting.

 

Also remember when overlaying the death mask on the daguerreotype that you need to horizontally reverse the latter first.

That's a good comparison.

[JAHS]

 

[mfbukowski]

I spoke to a TSA trainer who has been trained - and trains others - in facial recognition who says that they are not the same person.  No question.

Brow line is different and it appears the ear lobes insofar as they are visible are different.  Ears apparently are like fingerprints- no two are exactly alike.

There were some other differences as well.

For what it is worth.

We believe in what we want to believe in because it finds resonance with us.   Personally I don't much care.  As someone who has taken a LOT of art history courses (unfinished Master's degree)  it is clear to me that painted portraits are ALWAYS made to look "better" than what is "real".   I mean who is paying for the portrait?   Want to lay down a couple of $k. to be "ugly"?  - not likely!   And Joseph was a PROPHET!  Poor guy probably had to look like he just came down the Moses Path from the Mountain, glowing in the dark even if he had just been feeding the pigs!

As Kevin might say- for what it's worth.

 

Edited July 23, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Uno mas:

 

"This is not a pipe"

See Rorty siggy

Edited July 23, 2022 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

I spoke to a TSA trainer who has been trained - and trains others - in facial recognition who says that they are not the same person.  No question.

Brow line is different and it appears the ear lobes insofar as they are visible are different.  Ears apparently are like fingerprints- no two are exactly alike.

There were some other differences as well.

For what it is worth.

We believe in what we want to believe in because it finds resonance with us.   Personally I don't much care.  As someone who has taken a LOT of art history courses (unfinished Master's degree)  it is clear to me that painted portraits are ALWAYS made to look "better" than what is "real".   I mean who is paying for the portrait?   Want to lay down a couple of $k. to be "ugly"?  - not likely!   And Joseph was a PROPHET!  Poor guy probably had to look like he just came down the Moses Path from the Mountain, glowing in the dark even if he had just been feeding the pigs!

As Kevin might say- for what it's worth.

It sounds like they are assuming the painting is an accurate representation of his ears.  The problem is that the ears are not part of the death mask to compare the photo against.  As we can see with Emma's painting above, features can be painted very differently than they actually are (her nose and eyes look VERY different in the painting - and she looks 15 years younger in the painting).  I don't think it is safe to assume the painting is an accurate representation of the ears or brows.  The death mask will be the safest to compare against.  In comparing the death mask to the photo, the brow line is a perfect match.  You can see that in the overlay done by Zosimus above.  The only features that look a little off to me in the overlay are the nose and the lips, and maybe a little larger cheek bones in the mask.  

In listening to the podcast that Tacenda linked to, the professionals who compared and measured the death mask against the picture were 95% confident that it was the same person, with 19 out of 21 exact measurements.  They said that was very high and that you never really see perfect matches with death masks.  It sounds like they used several different overlay techniques and other measures to compare against.  Pretty thorough job by trained professionals.  Even an amateur (Zosimus) doing the overlay, it is pretty easy to see how well the features line up, like the brow line, hair line (which is also like a fingerprint) chin, eyes, etc look like perfect matches to me. 

I don't know if I feel confident in your TSA friends brief assessment when compared against the thorough studies already done.  I am not 100% convinced, but I am leaning towards it being Joseph based on what I have heard about the research and studies put into it. 

Edited July 23, 2022 by pogi

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I spoke to a TSA trainer who has been trained - and trains others - in facial recognition who says that they are not the same person.  No question.

Brow line is different and it appears the ear lobes insofar as they are visible are different.  Ears apparently are like fingerprints- no two are exactly alike.

There were some other differences as well.

For what it is worth.

We believe in what we want to believe in because it finds resonance with us.   Personally I don't much care.  As someone who has taken a LOT of art history courses (unfinished Master's degree)  it is clear to me that painted portraits are ALWAYS made to look "better" than what is "real".   I mean who is paying for the portrait?   Want to lay down a couple of $k. to be "ugly"?  - not likely!   And Joseph was a PROPHET!  Poor guy probably had to look like he just came down the Moses Path from the Mountain, glowing in the dark even if he had just been feeding the pigs!

As Kevin might say- for what it's worth.

 

Well that trainer needs to see halconero's post.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/74683-discovery-of-photograph-of-joseph-smith/?do=findComment&comment=1210106338

 

[Mike7110]

9 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I read most of this research and skimmed through and then got to the end, pages 75 and 76 which pretty much correlate to the finding of the actual photo of Joseph Smith. This gives me a reason to believe that this is a true photo. Thanks so much for the link. I'm convinced.

Your welcome, also I purchased the Community of Christ report and just finished studying it. Glad I did, it eased concerns I had from the 1962 Master's thesis. The research is well done on this.