Reader comments
LDS Church seeks to calm speculation about photo
42 comments | Read story
huh? | 4:49 p.m. March 19, 2008
Is there a story here? What is Joseph Smith doing in the photo? Drinking coffee?
FunGuy | 5:21 p.m. March 19, 2008
This daguerreotype image has been on the Internet for years. This isn't
"news," its "olds."
Comments continue below
Re: huh? | 5:40 p.m. March 19, 2008
Good question. It's just a picture.
RonRook | 5:50 p.m. March 19, 2008
Is there a point to this story? Whether Joseph Smith had a picture taken of him
or not makes what point???
Toria | 6:19 p.m. March 19, 2008
There are no known photographs of Joseph Smith, only paintings. I think everyone
hoping and wishing and would really like to know if this particular photo is
authentic or NOT? There are a great many old photos roaming around and about out
there, on Pioneers who haven't yet been placed or identified with the
proper pioneer person they belong too. Although, forensic science keeps getting
better, so perhaps these brilliant man can figure this interesting mystery out
as well.
Steve | 7:27 p.m. March 19, 2008
Amazing photo, my son had emailed it to me about six months ago. There is a
striking closeness to the paintings. Being very interesting to find out more
about it. I have forwarded it to a few of my friends, but have been waiting to
learn more of it's true nature.
Wow | 7:46 p.m. March 19, 2008
I sure would like to see it if it is real
Ken Goddard | 8:32 p.m. March 19, 2008
There are none of Jesus either.
Joe | 10:34 p.m. March 19, 2008
It is very unlikely to be Joseph Smith. First, there is a distinct lack of
resemblance in key features identified in contemporaneous paintings and the
death mask, specifically the eyebrows and strong chin.
There are bigger time-line problems; the first portrait daguerreotypes was taken in 1839. By 1843/1844 they were still rare, especially in Illinois. Had Joseph Smith sat for a daguerreotype, he would very likely have had it recorded in his journal.
Another point of counter-evidence is that other contemporaneous daguerreotypes of Nauvoo residents and more famous people in Illinois would have been taken.
There are bigger time-line problems; the first portrait daguerreotypes was taken in 1839. By 1843/1844 they were still rare, especially in Illinois. Had Joseph Smith sat for a daguerreotype, he would very likely have had it recorded in his journal.
Another point of counter-evidence is that other contemporaneous daguerreotypes of Nauvoo residents and more famous people in Illinois would have been taken.
spaz | 11:41 p.m. March 19, 2008
I feel that all this talk of a picture that someone somewhere states they have,
is all a bunch of bunk. Anything can be produced to reflect anything these
days, you don't even have to have a digital camera.
I hope that "IF" it's authenticated, and "IF" it's of value, that the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, obtain it for posterity sake and that sake alone.
But "IF" it's not authenticated. And those who say it is of Joseph Smith, the Prophet. That they have enough sense to stop this discussion of right and wrong with fellow Christians. And Grow UP. The Man lived, and Thousands know it, a picture only makes it concrete.
I hope that "IF" it's authenticated, and "IF" it's of value, that the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, obtain it for posterity sake and that sake alone.
But "IF" it's not authenticated. And those who say it is of Joseph Smith, the Prophet. That they have enough sense to stop this discussion of right and wrong with fellow Christians. And Grow UP. The Man lived, and Thousands know it, a picture only makes it concrete.
To Joe | 12:16 a.m. March 20, 2008
Joseph Smith DID record in his journal that he did in fact have a daguerreotype
taken of himself. The LDS church confirmed this earlier this week.
It will be interesting to see what the book had to say.
It will be interesting to see what the book had to say.
Re: Ken | 6:30 a.m. March 20, 2008
Thanks for giving me the first good laugh of the day
Mountain High | 7:38 a.m. March 20, 2008
Ref:RonRook
Obviously, Ronnie my boy, you just got out of your pampers and didn't realize that before digital there was..............probably not worth the time to try and explain something so complex as mid nineteenth century photography..... I seriously doubt that you would understand what a poloroid snapshot was either.
Obviously, Ronnie my boy, you just got out of your pampers and didn't realize that before digital there was..............probably not worth the time to try and explain something so complex as mid nineteenth century photography..... I seriously doubt that you would understand what a poloroid snapshot was either.
Jo fan | 7:50 a.m. March 20, 2008
So he had a bad hair day...leave him be.
wondering | 8:51 a.m. March 20, 2008
I wonder how this new photo will effect my faith?
Not.
Not.
shecky | 8:58 a.m. March 20, 2008
My photo was once circulated as being an old image of Mel Gibson, but nobody
seemed to make a big stink about that.
Anonymous | 9:18 a.m. March 20, 2008
If Emma had been a more faithful scrapbooker we wouldn't have this problem
today!
Rose | 10:11 a.m. March 20, 2008
I looked at the Photograph very closely last evening. And being a artist, I
studied his facial features quite closely, and I believe without any doubt in my
mind that the photograph is most definitely that of Joseph Smith Jr. This is a
remarkable and exciting find--and to know now that we have photograph of him.
Random | 10:15 a.m. March 20, 2008
I like the scrapbooking comment! That's good!
An actual picture would be interesting to see, but my faith isn't based on whether or not he ever had his picture taken. This is pretty much a non-story.
An actual picture would be interesting to see, but my faith isn't based on whether or not he ever had his picture taken. This is pretty much a non-story.
scrapbooking? | 10:23 a.m. March 20, 2008
That's not even funny. With all the trials they went through, mentioning
something as frivilous as scrapbooking isn't even slightly humorous. I saw
the photo... it looks similar enough... if it isn't his, it's probably
a relative.
Problems with this one | 10:29 a.m. March 20, 2008
Everybody is all over trying to prove that this is Joseph, well it can't
be. 1) The age of Joseph in the photograph would make this picture, a picture of
someone else because at the time, the only photographic technology available was
daguerrotypes and they DID NOT produce pictures with that quality and they could
not be reproduced onto film. These types of photographs (which this is) started
to appear in the mid 1850s. 2)The clothes he is wearing is consistant with
someone being photographed in the early 1860s and not the late 1830s. Sorry
people but this man is not Joseph Smith Jr.
Nice pic! | 10:33 a.m. March 20, 2008
Paintings and photo's never look just the same and the photo would look a
bit different than his paintings.
It would be nice though if there were a younger photo of Emma Smith as well.
I believe though that this is a photo of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
It would be nice though if there were a younger photo of Emma Smith as well.
I believe though that this is a photo of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
TooTHIN | 10:46 a.m. March 20, 2008
The foto looks too slender. From the paintings and comments I have read. He put
on weight and had a paunch. Not that I am critisizing. So do I. This just seems
way too skinny
Facts are fun | 11:19 a.m. March 20, 2008
To Joe posted 10:34 p.m. on the 19th I have a feeling that this book coming out
is going to make you eat your ignorant words.
Your comment of : "It is very unlikely to be Joseph Smith. First, there is a distinct lack of resemblance in key features identified in contemporaneous paintings and the death mask, specifically the eyebrows and strong chin."
If you have taken the time to review the material that has been done in the power point presentations by the author, you will find that this is the ONLY image of joseph smith, including the paintings that matches up perfectly with the death mask. Once you see them overlayed you will change your mind.
There were daguerreotypists in Nauvoo and elsewhere in the country. There are several documented opportunities for Joseph to take a picture. Don't function on assumptions of the time. Do the research and your mind will be opened.
Your comment of : "It is very unlikely to be Joseph Smith. First, there is a distinct lack of resemblance in key features identified in contemporaneous paintings and the death mask, specifically the eyebrows and strong chin."
If you have taken the time to review the material that has been done in the power point presentations by the author, you will find that this is the ONLY image of joseph smith, including the paintings that matches up perfectly with the death mask. Once you see them overlayed you will change your mind.
There were daguerreotypists in Nauvoo and elsewhere in the country. There are several documented opportunities for Joseph to take a picture. Don't function on assumptions of the time. Do the research and your mind will be opened.
The real thing... | 11:34 a.m. March 20, 2008
I believe this Photograph is that of the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. and i
don't think that he is too thin looking. How can anyone make a judgment of
him when they have never seen him. Although, I would and do doubt just a bit
that all the paintings of the prophet were all exactly of his true image. None
of Joseph Smith paintings look just the same. I would say that the Photograph is
however more of a realistic view of him.
David E. Richardson | 1:34 p.m. March 20, 2008
There are probably many photos, new and old, showing men who look(ed) more like
the photo of Joseph's death mask than the photo in question.
Spanky | 1:58 p.m. March 20, 2008
It looks like a photo of some Tom, Dick, Harry, or Joe Smith to me.
it's_Chet | 3:25 p.m. March 20, 2008
I believe this photo is real. Look at his face closely, particularly his upper
lip. You will see the scar he got when he and Sidney Rigdon were mobbed in
Kirtland. When the mob tried to force a vial of acid into his mouth, the vial
broke and the glass lacerated his upper lip. The photo is consistent with that.
There are other tells, such as stitched holes in his coat, that lend
credibility, though the scar is what I consider the strongest one.
I have seen a painting of Joseph Smith Jr, that looks an awful lot like this photograph. I know that the Nauvoo Temple was photographed not long after Joseph�s death, so the technology obviously existed. Also, I have seen a photograph of Joseph Smith III at about this age and I�d say that if this daguerreotype isn�t of Joseph Smith Jr, then it has got to be of Joseph Smith III. I still say this photo is most likely authentic. At the very least, when I look at it, I feel like I�m meeting the Prophet, and that�s good enough for me.
I have seen a painting of Joseph Smith Jr, that looks an awful lot like this photograph. I know that the Nauvoo Temple was photographed not long after Joseph�s death, so the technology obviously existed. Also, I have seen a photograph of Joseph Smith III at about this age and I�d say that if this daguerreotype isn�t of Joseph Smith Jr, then it has got to be of Joseph Smith III. I still say this photo is most likely authentic. At the very least, when I look at it, I feel like I�m meeting the Prophet, and that�s good enough for me.
kevin | 3:58 p.m. March 20, 2008
Cool picture!
It's be nice to have another image of the prophet. Who knows if it's him or not?
It's be nice to have another image of the prophet. Who knows if it's him or not?
dallin demie | 4:10 p.m. March 20, 2008
it's real i know it
truth | 5:04 p.m. March 20, 2008
FYI, I have received confirmation from the Lord through the Holy Spirit in the
celestial room of the Newport Beach temple that the image in question is indeed
a photograph of the Prophet Joseph. I know it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The
Lord will reveal his truth to those who ask him with a sincere heart and pure
intent. I wish that the Deseret News would seek prayerful, faithful
confirmation of the accuracy of their reporting when the stories involve such
important matters.
Mark Hoffman | 6:07 p.m. March 20, 2008
Did Mark Hoffman strike again LOL!
Lynn | 9:55 p.m. March 20, 2008
I'm one who says, "so?" What difference does it make if the
picture is really Joseph Smith? It certainly brings out the deep down character
of some who leave comments. . . Every thing from light hearted humor reminding
us of other frauds to those who are fiesty in defense of the photo, real or
fake. It's interesting to read the comments. . . and it really makes no
difference. . . either you believe in Joseph Smith or you don't. A photo
shouldn't change that.
Wow! | 10:32 p.m. March 20, 2008
If this is really Joseph Smith that will prove that he really did exist...
Smith Brothers | 10:34 p.m. March 20, 2008
If I could get a picture of Hyrum, I could sell cough drops.
Too may people worship the men and not the teaching.
Joseph Smith was a mouthpiece for the lord.
He was the instruments, not the Orchestra.
He was the violin, not the violinst.
A humble, uneducated man. I think there are many in the church with big homes and big Hummers that needed to be reminded of that.
Whether it;s him or not, I like the Picture.
Gandhi didn't have big muscles either.
Too may people worship the men and not the teaching.
Joseph Smith was a mouthpiece for the lord.
He was the instruments, not the Orchestra.
He was the violin, not the violinst.
A humble, uneducated man. I think there are many in the church with big homes and big Hummers that needed to be reminded of that.
Whether it;s him or not, I like the Picture.
Gandhi didn't have big muscles either.
Mahonri | 6:09 a.m. March 21, 2008
What does it matter? When in the Church Museum in SLC I asked why there were no
busts or statues of Joseph Smith and was told they had Brigham Young... because
he was more important.
So what is the worth of a simple photo, the Mormon Church has some of Brigham Young so who needs more?
So what is the worth of a simple photo, the Mormon Church has some of Brigham Young so who needs more?
Bart | 6:40 a.m. March 21, 2008
Good grief! I don't understand what all the fuss is about. A picture?
We're getting to be as bad as I thought the Catholics always were about
having icons. Live your religion and quit worrying about all the trappings.
South side sam | 7:31 a.m. March 21, 2008
Now I understand why the church wants to quell the story about this
picture.....which by the way has been known about for quite some time, and
summarily discussed and published before, mainly among people who understand
it's significance. Obviously from many of the uncouth remarks posted here,
many self ingratiated morons have the tendency to open their gapping trap
doors....sometimes referred to as having a voice.... simply to prove just how
ignorant they really are.......thus the churches response.....sort of a pearls
before swine sort of reasoning to the more intelligent among us.
Pete | 8:22 a.m. March 21, 2008
Great photo, good looking person, I hope it is the Prophet.
Chipster | 8:23 a.m. March 21, 2008
Here's what bothers me:
[direct quote from the Deseret News Story]
On the basis of available evidence it is not possible to confirm that the image is, in fact, of Joseph Smith," the LDS Church statement said, adding that speculation and claims about whether church officials "have verified or are verifying its authenticity ... are not true."
Does this mean that the church isn't ever even going to try and investigate. If you believe the statement of the church, they haven't done anything to prove or disprove the photo. Does this mean that they will never try? Or are they happier just keeping the whole thing a mystery?
The church does so much research in other areas, i.e. comparing the death mask with portraits. It seems like this photo deserves some attention; and not in secret, but through open dialog.
Here's what I'd rather hear from the church: "There is a lot of speculation about this photo. The answer is we really don't know whether it is or isn't the prophet Joseph Smith."
Why would they try to quell discussion without putting some of the best minds on checking it out?
[direct quote from the Deseret News Story]
On the basis of available evidence it is not possible to confirm that the image is, in fact, of Joseph Smith," the LDS Church statement said, adding that speculation and claims about whether church officials "have verified or are verifying its authenticity ... are not true."
Does this mean that the church isn't ever even going to try and investigate. If you believe the statement of the church, they haven't done anything to prove or disprove the photo. Does this mean that they will never try? Or are they happier just keeping the whole thing a mystery?
The church does so much research in other areas, i.e. comparing the death mask with portraits. It seems like this photo deserves some attention; and not in secret, but through open dialog.
Here's what I'd rather hear from the church: "There is a lot of speculation about this photo. The answer is we really don't know whether it is or isn't the prophet Joseph Smith."
Why would they try to quell discussion without putting some of the best minds on checking it out?
To Chipster | 2:18 p.m. March 31, 2008
Is it possible that the church considers this a low priority? Who cares if its
Joseph Smith or not. My testimony is not based on what he looked like, but
rather what he experienced and taught. Why do members of the church get so
caught up in dumb things?
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Aggies beat Spartans in snowy Logan 4:31 a.m.
- TCU 55, Utah 28 4:24 a.m.
- BYU 24, New Mexico 19 4:21 a.m.
- Jazz game at a glance 3:00 a.m.
- Real Salt Lake: Game at a glance 3:00 a.m.
- Stanford ends Y's soccer season 2:20 a.m.
- Jazz hope D-Will returns soon 2:19 a.m.
- Snow, SUU lose 2:18 a.m.
- Toone saves day for Wildcats 2:15 a.m.
- Win in New Mexico good for Y? 2:15 a.m.
- Apostle's wife felt comfort in attack
- BYU happy to escape with victory
- Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?
- Crash on snowy road kills woman
- GameDay in Fort Worth
- D-Will home for daughter
- Short-handed Jazz fly past Sixers
- Utes excited for 'dream' game
- Bench proves fruitful for Y.
- Collie featured in Sports Illustrated
- SLC council OKs gay rights policies
358 - Editorial: Mormons and gay rights200
- BYU happy to escape with victory198
- Will state consider gay rights law?148
- TCU creams U.136
- Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?130
- Letters: Strange breed in Utah129
- Utes remain silent about BCS120
- Pratt pleads not guilty to sex charges106
- Celtics crush Jazz104
If you are looking for a bird on the cheap, the following specials from...
How do you handle kids and contests? Our oldest daughter, 7, is of the...
Advertisement
Latest comments
For embarrassing the MWC tonight. As you've said for weeks, we'd rather win...
I'm so proud of our team tonight. They played really hard and never gave up....
You know I'm right about the conference topic..... why didn't you post my...
Championship game and championship teams and championship people from...
The reason that the world of academics outside the church does not respect...
Maybe UVU should get a basketball team that doesn't lose to Canadian teams in...
The Blacks in Africa know true poverty and suffering,and their faith excels.
TCU deserves to play for the national championship
Take one linguistics class and you will understand this tragedy. Language...
I'm stunned to see such a common sense article from the typically right-wing...
Advertisements
Just curious.