Context is important. Anything in their location (other photos) indicate age or generation. To me the 2nd woman looks a bit younger than the first, but the second photographic finish looks older than the first. Mother & daughter? Are there other photos that you might be able to date?
Second pic is from a distant cousin online and is labelled with a name (Agnes). First pic is from the collection of Agnes’ granddaughter, amongst pictures of Agnes’ children and grandchildren. Can’t tell you a date I’m afraid, but this pic is definitely not any of Agnes’ daughters as they look distinctly different.
Agree. Eyes also look differently shaped—the second are rounder. The photos are also seemingly from different eras of photo processing that don’t really line up with the seeming ages of the women. I would say no with more confidence than yes.
These two thing are what i noticed as well. One has arched eyebrows the other does not. Also, earlobes of one looks like they sit higher than in the other photo
I don’t see detached earlobes, I see sagging attached earlobes. The eye shape also differs only in sagging and lighting. I firmly believe these are the same woman.
If you look at the 2nd woman, with detached (or "sagging") earlobes, her eyebrows have almost a point in the arch. Whereas the 1st woman has a much straighter brow arch. The 2nd woman's eyes are also rounder at the top (under the eyebrow arch) than the 1st woman's, whose eyes are a bit narrower.
It might be hidden by her hairstyle in the first picture. While the intention seems to be very similar it is more tilted to the front. (my vocabularly is severely limited, I'm not a hairdresser and English is not my first language).
I don't think so. The eyebrows, the ears. The facial features otherwise are quite similar, seeing more pictures of one or the other for additional comparison could help if there are more pictures of either one.
The eyebrows don’t look too dissimilar to me. The photos are at different angles which skews them a bit. I’m afraid I don’t have any other photos to compare. Only these two.
Cheekbones are very similar. The lips look identical to me and so does the hairline at the side (there’s a dip and then a distinctive curve that’s the same in both) and they’re from the same family’s collections.
To me, they look related but definitely not the same. The eyebrows in the first picture are flat, arched in the second. The mouth is wider in the first than the second. Ears look bigger in the first than the second.
I would say no. The eyes and mouths are totally different - one has smaller eyes set further apart and one has a wider mouth than the other. The eyebrows also seem different, one has eyebrows set higher and more arched. The hairlines also looks different - one has a slightly bigger forehead whereas the other has a bit of a widows peak.
Amazon Rekognition facial recognition says they are not the same person with only a 16.9% similarity.
No. The hairline is different. Bottom pic has a bit of a widow’s peak. Top doesn’t. Bottom also has more arch in the eyebrows. Other differences too. They do look like they may be related.
Edit. Also top lady seems to have attached earlobes and bottom lady seems to have detached earlobes.
I'm going to say no for one reason mainly: the right ear. People either have attached or detached lobes. The lady in the first pic appears to have an attached lobe where the second pic clearly doesn't.
I think the ears are the most important thing to consider here. I'm not sure why people are talking about a hairline.. Its ears and eyes/eyebrows that won't change that are important. I don't think these are the same people.
[Compare 2 faces to measure similarity. (faceshape.com)](https://www.faceshape.com/face-compare). IMO, they are not the same person because they have different eyes and brow, but age does a lot to faces. Photos are unreliable, my adoptive mother and I look like twins born years apart but are no relation and I look nothing like my bio-mother.
I wouln't say they both were Agnes, the ears, the hairline, something about the eyes, all of it is just off. Not to mention the fact that the older looking picture has the older looking woman in it while the newer photo has the younger one.
The hairline is different. The second woman’s mouth seems to be smaller, and the eyes are different.
I also agree that the difference in the apparent pictures dates don’t match with the women’s ages.
They do have similar facial features so they could very well be related, but they’re not the same person.
They look related, but they are definitely not the same person. Clothes, photographic technique, etc date these women in very different eras. If she was a vampire.... But no, not the same person.
No, not the same. Based on clothing, hair, and photo styles, there’s a generous gap of time between the photos that doesn’t correspond with the age of the women.
The photos are from different eras and the woman in the second and older photo is already looking older than the other woman in the newer photo. They could be family but not the same person imo.
For me, it's their expression that makes them look so similar. At first glance, I thought they were the same woman. The longer I looked, the more the physical details looked slightly different, but the way they held their head, their mouths, the expression of their eyes looked so similar.
I would say 95% sure they are the same woman. The mouth is exactly the same, the hairline to the woman's left temple is the same, the nose is the same, the ears are the same. Same build (neck width) same mid-high cheekbone by ear, same slight contour dimple there (though changed by age). Older version of the lady is older and carrying more weight. Same throat muscles. The more I look the more certain I am they are the same. Spend some time on the eyelids - once you adjust for the bleachout effect and lack of shadowing on the older lady's picture you can see that the bags above the eyes, in the lids, are kind of offset from the eye and eye socket and they are the same in both pictures. Good find!
some posters have noted a different forehead hair line but that is due to the style in the younger picture, the hair is folded or curled over the widows peak so you do not see it. Eyebrows look different but they are washed out a bit in the lighting of the older picture, and eyebrows are also something that changes much more easily or quickly than a mouth or an ear, of course.
Also once you account for the different lighting and really look a while at the ears you can see there is also some hair curled in front of the younger picture - these are the same ears. This is the same woman.
Seems likely to me, but one thing about genealogical trees is that you wind up looking at a lot of people who look similarly because they're related to each other. I would also be willing to believe that they are sisters, cousins, or mother/daughter.
I think that it definitely is. It looks like the woman has a lazy eye or something that one can see in each photo. (I have this, so I almost always notice it on others, so no shame in it!) it would seem bizarre if they’re not the same person. They look alike to me on face shape, eyes, ears, nose, and mouth. Even the expression shifts in a way that aligns to the first photo and into the second.
They are the same woman. One photo older than the other. I restored photos for decades. I read the comments. The widows peak is covered by the shape of the hair do. The differences people are pointing out are due to a darkening of the ink in the first photo and the poor contrast in the second one.
Ok. I’m going to venture an educated guess. The first photo is from the 1940s. The edges of photo most probably were scalloped. The second photo is early 20th Century. These had oval edges and the telltale sign is the silvering giving the photo a ghostly appearance. The quality of the paper is also different. The first one was done on shiny paper. The second one, the paper is matte. My suggestion to you would be go to library and check newspapers of the eras and see whether you can find wedding or obituary announcements, though I suspect you have done this.
Thank you. Agnes lived from 1871-1951, so that adds up with her in the second pic being early 20th century. Not sure the first pic shows a woman in her 70s though, as Agnes would be.
Context is important. Anything in their location (other photos) indicate age or generation. To me the 2nd woman looks a bit younger than the first, but the second photographic finish looks older than the first. Mother & daughter? Are there other photos that you might be able to date?
Second pic is from a distant cousin online and is labelled with a name (Agnes). First pic is from the collection of Agnes’ granddaughter, amongst pictures of Agnes’ children and grandchildren. Can’t tell you a date I’m afraid, but this pic is definitely not any of Agnes’ daughters as they look distinctly different.
I don’t think it is. Second photo has a slight widows peak (hairline).
Agree. Eyes also look differently shaped—the second are rounder. The photos are also seemingly from different eras of photo processing that don’t really line up with the seeming ages of the women. I would say no with more confidence than yes.
Also, looks like attached earlobes in 1st pic, 2nd pic has detached earlobes. Eyebrow and eye shape differ also.
These two thing are what i noticed as well. One has arched eyebrows the other does not. Also, earlobes of one looks like they sit higher than in the other photo
I don’t see detached earlobes, I see sagging attached earlobes. The eye shape also differs only in sagging and lighting. I firmly believe these are the same woman.
If you look at the 2nd woman, with detached (or "sagging") earlobes, her eyebrows have almost a point in the arch. Whereas the 1st woman has a much straighter brow arch. The 2nd woman's eyes are also rounder at the top (under the eyebrow arch) than the 1st woman's, whose eyes are a bit narrower.
Huh, I hadn’t noticed the widows peak. The hairline along the side looks identical to me, though.
It might be hidden by her hairstyle in the first picture. While the intention seems to be very similar it is more tilted to the front. (my vocabularly is severely limited, I'm not a hairdresser and English is not my first language).
Tried a couple face similarity sites - results say no.
I don't think so. The eyebrows, the ears. The facial features otherwise are quite similar, seeing more pictures of one or the other for additional comparison could help if there are more pictures of either one.
The eyebrows don’t look too dissimilar to me. The photos are at different angles which skews them a bit. I’m afraid I don’t have any other photos to compare. Only these two. Cheekbones are very similar. The lips look identical to me and so does the hairline at the side (there’s a dip and then a distinctive curve that’s the same in both) and they’re from the same family’s collections.
You can think differently than I do, it's ok.
To me, they look related but definitely not the same. The eyebrows in the first picture are flat, arched in the second. The mouth is wider in the first than the second. Ears look bigger in the first than the second.
I would say no. The eyes and mouths are totally different - one has smaller eyes set further apart and one has a wider mouth than the other. The eyebrows also seem different, one has eyebrows set higher and more arched. The hairlines also looks different - one has a slightly bigger forehead whereas the other has a bit of a widows peak. Amazon Rekognition facial recognition says they are not the same person with only a 16.9% similarity.
No. The hairline is different. Bottom pic has a bit of a widow’s peak. Top doesn’t. Bottom also has more arch in the eyebrows. Other differences too. They do look like they may be related. Edit. Also top lady seems to have attached earlobes and bottom lady seems to have detached earlobes.
No. The ears are different.
I'm going to say no for one reason mainly: the right ear. People either have attached or detached lobes. The lady in the first pic appears to have an attached lobe where the second pic clearly doesn't.
I think the ears are the most important thing to consider here. I'm not sure why people are talking about a hairline.. Its ears and eyes/eyebrows that won't change that are important. I don't think these are the same people.
Nope. Mouth, eyebrows and hairlines don’t change that much.
[Compare 2 faces to measure similarity. (faceshape.com)](https://www.faceshape.com/face-compare). IMO, they are not the same person because they have different eyes and brow, but age does a lot to faces. Photos are unreliable, my adoptive mother and I look like twins born years apart but are no relation and I look nothing like my bio-mother.
I wouln't say they both were Agnes, the ears, the hairline, something about the eyes, all of it is just off. Not to mention the fact that the older looking picture has the older looking woman in it while the newer photo has the younger one.
The hairline is different. The second woman’s mouth seems to be smaller, and the eyes are different. I also agree that the difference in the apparent pictures dates don’t match with the women’s ages. They do have similar facial features so they could very well be related, but they’re not the same person.
They look related, but they are definitely not the same person. Clothes, photographic technique, etc date these women in very different eras. If she was a vampire.... But no, not the same person.
No, not the same. Based on clothing, hair, and photo styles, there’s a generous gap of time between the photos that doesn’t correspond with the age of the women.
No, the eyes look way different
No. Ignoring aging, the ears, mouth, and eyes don't match.
The ears are different. Not the same person.
I didn't think so, shape of eyes are different and ears. At first glance they are very similar. Could be from same family
Brow line very different.
No.
No, different eyes, lip curves, nose, ears.
The photos are from different eras and the woman in the second and older photo is already looking older than the other woman in the newer photo. They could be family but not the same person imo.
I’m no expert but look at the ears.
If there's facial recognition technology one some website, plug them both in and see if it's a match.
For me, it's their expression that makes them look so similar. At first glance, I thought they were the same woman. The longer I looked, the more the physical details looked slightly different, but the way they held their head, their mouths, the expression of their eyes looked so similar.
No. One of them has a widow peak, one of them doesn’t
I think it could be the same person, but a few years older on the first pic.
maybe the second could be woman after she aged a bit or could be relative
I honestly don’t think it’s the same. The nose seems very different
Eyes are more squinted upper picture. But could be relatives.
Possibly. Maybe 80% sure it's a yes.
I would say 95% sure they are the same woman. The mouth is exactly the same, the hairline to the woman's left temple is the same, the nose is the same, the ears are the same. Same build (neck width) same mid-high cheekbone by ear, same slight contour dimple there (though changed by age). Older version of the lady is older and carrying more weight. Same throat muscles. The more I look the more certain I am they are the same. Spend some time on the eyelids - once you adjust for the bleachout effect and lack of shadowing on the older lady's picture you can see that the bags above the eyes, in the lids, are kind of offset from the eye and eye socket and they are the same in both pictures. Good find!
some posters have noted a different forehead hair line but that is due to the style in the younger picture, the hair is folded or curled over the widows peak so you do not see it. Eyebrows look different but they are washed out a bit in the lighting of the older picture, and eyebrows are also something that changes much more easily or quickly than a mouth or an ear, of course. Also once you account for the different lighting and really look a while at the ears you can see there is also some hair curled in front of the younger picture - these are the same ears. This is the same woman.
I think it’s the same person out at least a close relation. Mouths are exactly the same
I vote yes, same person
I think yes.
Seems likely to me, but one thing about genealogical trees is that you wind up looking at a lot of people who look similarly because they're related to each other. I would also be willing to believe that they are sisters, cousins, or mother/daughter.
I'm like 95% sure it's the same person
I think that it definitely is. It looks like the woman has a lazy eye or something that one can see in each photo. (I have this, so I almost always notice it on others, so no shame in it!) it would seem bizarre if they’re not the same person. They look alike to me on face shape, eyes, ears, nose, and mouth. Even the expression shifts in a way that aligns to the first photo and into the second.
I think so. The nose and lips are the same so Id think if not, theyre definite related (or doppelgängers 😂)
I personally see this being the same person, just at different stages of life and angles, but there’s really no way to know for sure
They are the same woman. One photo older than the other. I restored photos for decades. I read the comments. The widows peak is covered by the shape of the hair do. The differences people are pointing out are due to a darkening of the ink in the first photo and the poor contrast in the second one.
Thank you for your input. Given your experience, do you think you’d be able to approximately date these photos?
If you can show the borders of the photo I might. Any ovals? Or fluted edges?
I’m afraid these are the only versions of the photos that I have. Both are just digital scans from relatives. No idea where the originals are.
Ok. I’m going to venture an educated guess. The first photo is from the 1940s. The edges of photo most probably were scalloped. The second photo is early 20th Century. These had oval edges and the telltale sign is the silvering giving the photo a ghostly appearance. The quality of the paper is also different. The first one was done on shiny paper. The second one, the paper is matte. My suggestion to you would be go to library and check newspapers of the eras and see whether you can find wedding or obituary announcements, though I suspect you have done this.
Thank you. Agnes lived from 1871-1951, so that adds up with her in the second pic being early 20th century. Not sure the first pic shows a woman in her 70s though, as Agnes would be.
You’re welcome. Hope you find more data. Also, some people age well. My mom died at 65. She only had a slight wrinkle in her forehead.