Judging by the faces of
people in photographs from the 19th century,
you would probably assume that everyone alive back
then was completely miserable. It raises the questions,
why didn't anyone smile in old photographs? And when did those frowns
finally turn upside down? Well, today we're going to take
a look at why no one smiles in old photographs. But before we get started,
be sure to subscribe to the Weird History channel. After that, leave
a comment and let us know what other technological
innovations you would like to hear about. OK, time to scooch in a little
closer to your cousin Jeffrey and hold that pose for
some Weird History. [MUSIC PLAYING] Despite what a modern
person may assume based on the
photographic record, people in the 19th
century were indeed happy, even if there's little
photographic evidence to prove it. According to Angus
Trumble, director of Australia's National
Portrait Gallery, people in human history have
smiled, laughed, and behaved more or less as they do today. Psh, pics or it
didn't happen, Angus. That people have smiled
since the dawn of humanity seems fairly self-evident. But if that's the
case, why didn't they smile in photographs
for decades on end? As Trumbull explains,
people have always smiled naturally
and spontaneously in the private sphere. But photographs were seen as
public rather than private. He contextualizes those
overly-serious expressions by pointing to 19th
century cultural norms. What is radically different
is public performance and public presentation. In other words,
it was OK to smile when you were in private, away
from the impressionable eyes of children. But when you were in public,
you were expected to be serious. After all, you can't be
seen smiling in public like some kind of lunatic. What would society think? In the 19th century, wide grins
carried negative associations. This was because large
smiles were considered a sign of mental instability. Basically, if you smiled
too widely in public, everyone just assumed
you were the Joker and gave you a wide berth. Even today, it's still
considered a good rule of thumb to avoid anyone in
a Joker T-shirt. In the Victorian era,
a lack of control over your emotions
and facial expressions broke decorum, which
meant that those who wore smiles were
pretty much automatically assumed to be drunken perverts. That's a pretty big assumption. Maybe it's true. The prejudiced
against wide smiles meant that while a demure,
faint smile might ultimately appear in a portrait,
big toothy grins almost never did, since drunken
pervert wasn't the look most people were going for. Not yet, anyway. [MUSIC PLAYING] Even today, many people
consider posing for a photograph to be somewhat unnerving. What do you do with your hands? What if you have something
stuck in your teeth? And what if that
celebrity photobombs you? It's a lot to think about. But in the 19th
century, many found posing for a picture even
worse than unnerving. It was downright frightening. Professor Christina
Kotchemidova found that many early
amateur portraits reveal their subjects
had a fear of the camera. And modern folks might
feel the same way if we still use the same
lingo they did back then. For example, some of the
first photography studios were called operation rooms. The photographers told subjects
to pose before the instruments. Because nothing really
puts people at ease like implying they're
about to undergo surgery. Luckily, someone at the
Eastman Kodak company realized that making
people fear for their lives right before snapping their
picture was maybe not the best approach. The company made
a concerted effort to address People's
fear of the camera by promoting photo studios
as pleasant, rather than frightening. An entry in one of
Kodak's corporate journals recounts the experience of
an anonymous employee who would tell people that going
to a photography studio to get your picture
taken was just as enjoyable as going to a
large drapery establishment. Were the old days that boring,
or draperies way cooler back then? He would then talk about
the charming pictures which show the latest fashions and
dress, about the new styles of finishing and mounting,
toys for amusing children, in fact, anything
pleasant, all of the things that would eventually become
hallmarks of countless photo studios in malls
around the world. The whole context in which
people understood photography was also completely different
from how we perceive it today. Take, for example,
Victorian death portraits. Weird History viewers
who saw our videos on how Victorians spent their
free time, or bizarre ways people from Victorian
England mourned their dead, know that when a family
member passed away, especially a young child, their
living relatives would often pose with the body
for a family portrait, giving them one
final opportunity to throw up their signs. Photography allowed
families to capture an image of their departed loved
one, preserving their likeness. Before the advent of
snapshots, most families had no images of
their loved ones, but could commission a
portrait after their passing. The Association of
photography and death certainly contributed
to the seriousness with which photos, and the
poses in them, were treated. [MUSIC PLAYING] In the 19th century,
dental hygiene was nothing like it is today. Prior to the invention
of photography, that wasn't really a problem. Well, not from a portraiture
point of view, anyway. A portrait artist could
easily hide rotten teeth with a brush of paint. But long before Photoshop and
Instagram made the ability to edit photos
ubiquitous, it was extremely difficult
to avoid the fact that photography revealed
a subject's rotting and missing teeth. Angus Trumble, the
aforementioned director of Australia's National
Portrait Gallery, and the guy with a pretty cool
name, explains, "People had lousy teeth
if they had teeth at all. Which militated against opening
your mouth in social settings." Makes sense. Nobody wants a family portrait
in which everyone looks like a Jack-o'-lantern. Luckily, dental
hygiene and hygiene improved over the years. And with those
improvements, people began to get more comfortable
showing off their pearly whites in photos. [MUSIC PLAYING] Much like a Spin Doctors band
photo, the dismal appearance of people in 19th century
photographs wasn't accidental. In fact, the subjects were
very specifically directed, and took measures to
accentuate their dourness. For example, you know
how modern photographers will ask the subject
to say "cheese" in order to stretch their
mouth and make them smile. Well in the 19th century, the
exact opposite was desired. So photographers
told their subjects to say "prunes" in order
to keep their mouths small. It also inspired
general frowniness because nobody likes
thinking about prunes. A small mouth fit
Victorian beauty standards, and a more demure expression
followed proper etiquette at the time. During the 19th century,
photographers often borrowed from the more established art
form of painting, and smiles were considered
inappropriate for portraits. In fact, this unspoken
rule against smiling was one of the reasons that
Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa, and her enigmatic smile,
was a sensation for centuries. What the hell is
she so zany about? Paintings were meant to be
serious records of someone significant enough
to be remembered. So few don smiles
for the occasion, preferring expressions of
gravitas and importance. The same rules that
govern painted portraits were applied in photographs. It would be quite a
while before photography became common enough
to allow for the kind of cheeky experimentation
that would lead to duck face. Speaking of duck face, in 1839,
amateur photographer Robert Cornelius took what
is believed to be the first selfie in history. It did not seem like a
big deal at the time. But for many people
today, it makes him as important as the
people who discovered penicillin and electricity. Cornelius was
interested in chemistry, so he chose to take a
self-portrait at his family's Philadelphia store. To capture the image, Cornelius
removed the camera's lens cap, ran into the frame, and
stood motionless for 1 minute before returning
to cover the lens. Of course, Cornelius
didn't smile in his selfie. Instead, he struck
a serious pose, perhaps because
he hoped to prove that the daguerreotype
process could take portraits. Cornelius later went on to
run one of the first photo studios in the country. Another thing to bear in mind
is that in the early days of photography, exposure
times were lengthy. Subjects in these
photographs often had to sit completely
still for up to 15 minutes for a single picture. Rather than trying to hold
a smile for that long, most people chose a
more serious expression. It's hard to blame them. Holding a smile
non-stop for 15 minutes can definitely get uncomfortable
and make you appear deranged, like a clown prince of crime. The long exposure
times also help explain why so many old
photographs look blurry. A single motion during the
exposure could, and often did, result in a blurry
picture, lending it the appearance of being more
haunted than it actually was. Every photograph taken back
then was at least a little haunted by default. People's unpleasant expressions
in old-timey photographs were also driven by
technological and cultural considerations. Living in an era where
pretty much everyone has a high-quality camera
built into their phone, it can be hard for us to wrap
our heads around the fact that, in the early
years of photography, very few people had their
pictures taken at all. Even fewer had those
pictures taken at home. To get a photograph
taken, your average Joe had to visit a photography
studio, which required backdrops and a formal setting. And all that could wind
up being a little pricey. Even though photographs were
cheaper than painted portraits, they were often
prohibitively expensive and still comparatively rare. So many people were
only photographed once in their entire lives. As such, most people chose to
treat the event with gravity. Because I guess, if
you're going to have one picture of
yourself, you want to make sure it looks like
a time traveler's mug shot, and not like you're actually
enjoying the experience. Ah, different strokes. Also dropping a stack of
bills on what was essentially a novelty purchase
doesn't exactly put you in a whistling mood. [MUSIC PLAYING] The growing number of grins
in 20th century photographs came about partly
because of Kodak. At the time, Kodak had a virtual
monopoly on cameras and film, so the company strongly
influenced photography as a whole. Usually, a monopoly
doesn't work out so well for the general public. I mean, has anyone ever
actually finished that game? Professor Christina
Kotchemidova argues that Kodak wanted to
associate photography with travel and
holidays, linking photos with happy occasions
in advertisements, promoted the idea that people
should smile in snapshots. And slowly, the idea
started to sink in. In a study of US high school
yearbook photos published between 1905 and 2013,
researchers found an increase in lip curvature
across the decades. While few students smiled in
their 1905 yearbook photos, by the mid-20th century, smiles
were larger and more common. And women smiled more
than men in every decade. The change in people's
perception of photography also came about as
photography became more affordable in the
early 20th century, thanks again to Kodak. In 1900, they released
the Brownie camera, which only cost $1, or about
33 bucks in today's money. That's pretty cheap for a
camera, but wildly overpriced for a brownie. Instead of visiting
a photography studio for a formal
portrait photograph, people could snap their
own photographs at home. This led to a more
relaxed process, which in turn, led to even
more smiles, And presumably, shortly thereafter,
the first photo of a dog in a funny outfit. So what do you think? Do you smile in photographs? Let us know in the
comments below. And while you're at it, check
out some of these other videos from our Weird History.
