Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Earliest-born person ever captured on film


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,021 posts
  • LocationLondon

This is Hannah Stilley, photographed in 1840.

 

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

 

To put things in perspective, if we travel forwards in time by the same amount (268 years), it's equivalent to seeing a person from the year 2282.

 

 

Posted Image


  • SG-1, Casey, FutureOfToday and 6 others like this

#2
Kemotx

Kemotx

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 503 posts
  • LocationWrocław

This is Hannah Stilley, photographed in 1840.

 

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

 

To put things in perspective, if we travel forwards in time by the same amount (268 years), it's equivalent to seeing a person from the year 2282.

 

 

Posted Image

 

She must've seen a lot of history...I barely remember the 20th Century, being only born in 1994.



#3
Casey

Casey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 550 posts

94 years old, huh. What year did she die and what country was she from?

 

I've always found it disappointing that there's no photographs of George Washington. The first picture was taken in 1814, so if he'd hung on that long he might've had one taken. Too bad the perfect storm of coincidences and unfortunate circumstances had to off him in 1799.



#4
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas

Or if she had seen a photo of someone that old, it would have been from the year 1478.  (1746-268)...can you imagine?   Mind = blown.


Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#5
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

The first picture was taken in 1814, so if he'd hung on that long he might've had one taken.

Source, please?



#6
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

The word "film" here is misleading. Perhaps a better characterization of this woman would be "likely the earliest-born person ever to be photographed.


  • FutureOfToday likes this

#7
Casey

Casey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 550 posts

 

The first picture was taken in 1814, so if he'd hung on that long he might've had one taken.

Source, please?

 

 

The 1814 factoid was something I read a few years ago; just searched on Google and turns out I remembered correctly. http://inventors.abo...Photography.htm



#8
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,021 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

The word "film" here is misleading. Perhaps a better characterization of this woman would be "likely the earliest-born person ever to be photographed.

 

 

Erm, camera film is... film.

 

You're aware that film cameras existed before digital, right?


  • eacao and SG-1 like this

#9
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas

wat?


Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#10
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,021 posts
  • LocationLondon

https://en.wikipedia...otographic_film



#11
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

 

 

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

The word "film" here is misleading. Perhaps a better characterization of this woman would be "likely the earliest-born person ever to be photographed.

 

 

Erm, camera film is... film.

 

You're aware that film cameras existed before digital, right?

Yes, camera film is film, but when I myself think of "film", I think more of things such as movies, et cetera, rather than only photographs.



#12
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

 

 

The first picture was taken in 1814, so if he'd hung on that long he might've had one taken.

Source, please?

 

 

The 1814 factoid was something I read a few years ago; just searched on Google and turns out I remembered correctly. http://inventors.abo...Photography.htm

Thanks for this information. :) However, based on this page (and as I already previously suspected), the 1837 photographic image appears to be much more important due to the fact that it didn't fade like the 1814 photographic image did.


  • Casey likes this

#13
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    CY: 2015

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts
  • LocationMaidstone, UK

She was born in 1746 – likely the earliest-born person ever captured on film.

The word "film" here is misleading. Perhaps a better characterization of this woman would be "likely the earliest-born person ever to be photographed.
  Erm, camera film is... film.   You're aware that film cameras existed before digital, right?
I know technically it's correct, but in modern language, the term "film" is generally accepted to mean a motion picture/video, and to be honest I came here expecting to see video footage as well. Still very interesting though!
  • Futurist likes this
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

#14
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas

You kids these days.

 

When I think of film I think of rolls of film that get developed at stores.  You don't know what I'm talking about do you?  The dark brown things you can't touch, with a really really tiny image of the thing you took a picture of.  Then it takes days for you develop them and sometimes they come out all shitty and ruined.


  • wjfox likes this

Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#15
TheAsianGuy_LOL

TheAsianGuy_LOL

    What's Up Homies

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • LocationThe Stars of Which to be Settled

Lol, when I think of film, I see camera films. I associate video or vid to videos.


"We know Everything, but not Everything"~ Me

"Don't question what I know, question what I don't know."~ Me

"Fear kills more dreams than failure ever will"~Italian UFO


#16
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,021 posts
  • LocationLondon

You kids these days.

 

When I think of film I think of rolls of film that get developed at stores.  You don't know what I'm talking about do you?  The dark brown things you can't touch, with a really really tiny image of the thing you took a picture of.  Then it takes days for you develop them and sometimes they come out all shitty and ruined.

 

Exactly. :)



#17
Frizz

Frizz

    fey pansexual alcoholic non-human

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts
  • LocationPlato's Atlantis

You kids these days.

 

When I think of film I think of rolls of film that get developed at stores.  You don't know what I'm talking about do you?  The dark brown things you can't touch, with a really really tiny image of the thing you took a picture of.  Then it takes days for you develop them and sometimes they come out all shitty and ruined.

oh please SG-1, you were born in 1995.


“Give me time and I’ll give you a revolution.”
- Alexander McQueen

#18
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas

Thats why its funny.

But I do remember a time where digital cameras were so expensive that we used film.


Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#19
Mashallah

Mashallah

    Transgender student

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • LocationSerbia

Kids these days. I remember using a literal film projector similar to this one in order to watch slideshow cartoons.

Posted Image


I don't like being lied to, but I'm also tired of The Truth.

Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users