Post by mjbrathwaite on Mar 26, 2013 20:49:47 GMT -5
Photography has been around in various forms since the 5th Century BC, and negatives were invented developed in 1835, but commercial photography wasn't around in 1836, so it seems unlikely that the photo is of Bonham.
Post by Mark Barnett on Apr 6, 2013 8:42:40 GMT -5
From what I understand, the process of making a photo-type image has existed before the1830's, but no one could fix the image to where it would last. In other words, the image would fade away fairly quicky and you would be left with nothing to look at. In 1839, a Frenchman named Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre invented the "daguerreotype" and he and his business partner had found a way to finally curing the image to stay and last forever. As far as I know, my research suggests that this photo is a relative of James Butler Bonham, perhaps a nephew. Apologies I haven't been active on this site in a long time; I'm currently trying my hand at doing comic book artwork. You can find me here: barneybluepants.deviantart.com/
You can see my artwork at: http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/mark-barnett.html?tab=watchlistactivity
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 8, 2013 14:59:21 GMT -5
Wasn't that one "unfound" or not brought to light until about 10-12 years ago? Pretty amazing and the best evidence of what the church looked like in 1836, although not definitive. I think the place suffered a lot of damage in the 13 years before the dag was made. People seemed to have taken stones from the place for construction and others sold them to tourists as Alamo souvenirs. The same thing happened to the Roman Colosseum.
“I knew, even as a boy, that to love this world one must keep one’s distance” -- Bishop Daisy - "King of Hearts"