Cool, Cheesy & Ancient Family Pictures
- Thread starter superstring01
- Start date
Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
Hay String I will get my son over to show me how to scan and post, I set up a few for ya.
superstring01
Moderator
Really? Do so few people have old and/or interesting photos to post? Wow.
~String
~String
Here here!...I wanna see more horn rim glasses and crew cuts....or some big ass collars!
Thanks to who made this sticky.
superstring01
Moderator
Here's three more interesting ones:
Paternal grandfather (standing next to great grandmother)
Mother (blond girl with hood, bottom right)
Self and friend (Pascual) posing for a picture near Niagara Falls
Paternal grandfather (standing next to great grandmother)
Mother (blond girl with hood, bottom right)
Self and friend (Pascual) posing for a picture near Niagara Falls
superstring01
Moderator
string:
you look so different with hair!
Don't remind me!
The one and only physical attribute I inherited from my biological father was baldness. Bastard. (Just look at the picture of my frandfather: wonderful, full, grey hair, into his fifties!)
I had GREAT hair. Amazing hair, then round about 28 it started saying goodbye. I went to a doctor and he said that Propecia would probably save most of it and even bring back that which was lost, but at a price tag that I was not willing to continuously pay for, for the remainder of my life. So, I shaved my head and noticed that it didn't look altogether bad, and ever since then, I've been Baldy McBalditon.
~String
Awwww, all that gorgeous hair! My brother has a full head of hair too, and constantly worries about it going off! You inherit baldness from the X chromosome, so its your mum's fault somewhere along the line.
superstring01
Moderator
Awwww, all that gorgeous hair! My brother has a full head of hair too, and constantly worries about it going off! You inherit baldness from the X chromosome, so its your mum's fault somewhere along the line.
Well, then, it looks like I got nothing at all from the sperm donor. Even better.
~String
This is some 100 year old photo we found at my wife's great aunt's old house after she died. The interesting thing (to us) is that whoever this ancient dude is, he's the spitting image of my wife's uncle:
Notice how people were always all serious in really old photos? You never see any rabit ears, and rarely even see a smile.
Notice how people were always all serious in really old photos? You never see any rabit ears, and rarely even see a smile.
The time when Americans were moral...seriousness of a person shows their sincerity. Smile is most likely fake, nowdays, its a mask people wear.
Here's three more fantastic pics:
Self (in yellow) and three of my siblings. That's right: we're in a totally self-made white-trashy marching band. (just LOOK at those bell-bottoms!)
This is a great picture to capture. I don't get enough pictures like this of my kids. I feel I have missed out on some of the best moments, not having a camera around. A lot of the pictures are too posed and set up.
It's funny to look back on old pictures. I find no matter whose you look at there are so many similarities if you are about the same age. It is like they only sold
a few different styles of couches back then. I think we all owned the same plaid pants back then too.
Madanthonywayne......What a cute little boy you were.
Last edited:
superstring01
Moderator
Actually, you are wrong, Draq, again. Do us all a favor and do some research before you start bullshitting.
People smiled back then. Probably more than we do now. They did goofy things. They farted. Burped. They played in the dirt. Rolled on the ground with their children. Chatted in church. Gossiped. Laughed. Cried. Backstabbed. Goofed-off and got into trouble at about the same rate we do today.
In the era of old photography (before the "snap shot" camera) the time it took to expose a photo was between 20 seconds (for an excellent quality shot) and a minute (for a low quality shot). The chemical reaction was extremely slow. Because of this, any movement during the shooting would blur the photo excessively, so the photographer instructed the family to sit and hold themselves (and faces) in a manner that they could maintain for a long period of time. Smiling, in a genuine way, is difficult beyond a few seconds, and after about ten seconds becomes almost unbearably tiresome. Therefore, people adopted a frame of expression that was easy to hold.
Thus: the austere looks in photos. Only in your twisted, bizzarro world, does smiling in a photo somehow equate to low morality.
~String
PS: the USA was FAR more immoral back in the 1800's than it is now. Women were beaten freely, there was child labor where they died and were maimed on a daily basis, there was slavery, immigrants (especially non-wasps) were expendable, prostitution in large and small cities was far more prevalent than today. Even the murder rate in places like NYC and San Francisco far exceeds todays numbers. The list goes on and on. You might want to open a book and look at what the 1800's were like before you make assumptions.
Last edited:
Sciencelovah
Registered Senior Member
Me and the little bro, 1993, Saudi Arabia.
Steve, you don't change much! Did you have a long hair or something?? Cute photos too, btw!
This is some 100 year old photo we found at my wife's great aunt's old house after she died. The interesting thing (to us) is that whoever this ancient dude is, he's the spitting image of my wife's uncle:
Notice how people were always all serious in really old photos? You never see any rabit ears, and rarely even see a smile.
Perhaps his smile has faded over time. He knows he is dead.