Deseret News | LDS Church seeks to quell photo buzz

Reader comments
LDS Church seeks to quell photo buzz

161 comments | Read story

Mike from Chino, CA | 10:12 a.m. March 20, 2008

The church will undoubtedly employ experts to determine the authenticity of this image, so long as they may feel the need to do such. What leaves me flummoxed is how so many are willing to vote yay or nay without any hint of evidence. Maybe we should wait to see what the church says?

Problems with this picture | 10:20 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.

Fredd | 10:31 a.m. March 20, 2008

Why should anyone want evidence? What kind of evidence? Scientific eveidence? Science changes all the time. They could say this is or is not Joseph Smith today and get new evidence and change their mind tomorrow. I think we should all pray about it and see what the spirit says.

Comments continue below

R. Daw | 10:36 a.m. March 20, 2008

I received a copy of the purported photograph of Joseph Smith Jr. last week. I sent an email to the Community of Christ Church and received the following response from the Church,

"This photo was accessioned by the Community of Christ several years ago. It has not been released for distribution and we are left to wonder where you received it. We do not believe it to be Joseph Smith, Jr.but of some other person.

Ken Stobaugh
Missionary Ministries Office

Who Cares | 10:43 a.m. March 20, 2008

If it's Joseph Smith, GREAT, if it's not, who cares. It would be great to have a photo of Joseph Smith, but does it change anything with the way we believe? No, it's just a photo.

Stewart | 11:00 a.m. March 20, 2008

It is possible that this is a daguerreotype of Joseph Smith Jr., but not very likely. The daguerreotype was invented in France in 1839, and the first professional studio came to New York in 1844. President Tyler was the first president photographed, but that was in 1845. As we all know Joseph Smith Jr. was assassinated in 1844. It seems a stretch to think that this technology would reach the American Frontier in less than 5years. Nauvoo, at this time was at the edge of the U.S. Frontier. Would an obscure religious leader be photo graphed before a sitting president?

Aaron T. | 11:05 a.m. March 20, 2008

I don't have a strong opinion as to whether its him or not, but I wouldn't be suprised.
I have noticed that painted and sketched portraits of that era in the US, like the ones we have of JS, seem to be a bit folky and probably don't bear exact resemblance of their subjects.

Richard | 11:29 a.m. March 20, 2008

I am grateful, though somewhat surprised, that no one claims to verify the photo through the benefit of a dream or vision. I love Joseph Smith. With the equivalent of four Doctorate degree's in the study of the law, philosophy, science and theology, I am inundated with the world. Joseph Smith; his revelations and philosophy of truth, have sustained me and profoundly anchored my beliefs. Now, if I am regarding what could be his photo, I am thrilled. If it is not, I am, nevertheless intrigued. I see a goodness in this subject's eyes that causes me 'wonder'.

Patsy | 12:18 p.m. March 20, 2008

Mike from Chino, CA says: "The church will undoubtedly employ experts to determine the authenticity of this image... Maybe we should wait to see what the church says?"

Ha, like they have such a great track record of determining the authenticity of historical documents!

SO? | 12:31 p.m. March 20, 2008

As a member of the church with a testimony I ask this important question, Who Cares? Is it going to bring others closer to Christ, etc.

We all need more to do, apparently.

Ken Baguley | 12:44 p.m. March 20, 2008

As a side note,...there several copies of the death masks...I've even seen them at the Printing Museum on Center St. in Provo...That's about 375 E. Center. If you want to experience an outstanding presentation of the history of printing from Gutenberg through the time of the printing of the B of M...Go. A treat you'll want to take your friends to see again and again.

Relevance? | 12:44 p.m. March 20, 2008

Reporter with too much time, and people with too many silly opinions. It is simply not important enough to care. If it is JS, great. If it is not, great. It just does not matter.

Not him! | 12:51 p.m. March 20, 2008

This guy's hair is too neat and his shoulders are not broad enough. ;)

Fools! | 12:53 p.m. March 20, 2008

Apparently no one on this blog has an eye for authenticity. This picture is of most definitely of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Go pray about it you fools!

Spanish Fark | 12:54 p.m. March 20, 2008

Not Joseph Smith, he didn't look like that, he looked like a big Charlton heston type guy, this guys too wimpy. Just look at the statues. The one in the Joseph smith building, he's at leest 8 feet high.

Re: 6th Cousin | 1:12 p.m. March 20, 2008

I agree that it's much more likely for this to be Joseph Smith III. Even if it doesn't exactly look like the photo of him that the RLDS church displays, it's obvious that this would be a much younger picture of him. There's definitely a resemblance to Joseph Smith Jr. but if the timing is what everyone is saying it is, it's a little bit of a stretch to say that it's him. Still, it doesn't really matter but it would be cool to know for sure.

Anonymous | 1:16 p.m. March 20, 2008

Why does it matter? Actors have portrayed him, artists have produced their interpretation of Joseph Smith again and again. What gives this photo all this importance. I have received two emails about it... why? If it is or isn't him, does that change his life's work, his mission on Earth or anything else about him? Nice photo, not worth all this.

I care | 1:12 p.m. March 20, 2008

To you people who ask, 'who cares'? - a question like that contributes nothing and makes you look ignorant. To: "Problems With this Picture" and others - - - I side with a rational educated determining of the photograph - any un-educated individual who jumps to conclusions one way or another as to whether or not this photograph is or is not Joseph Smith is sign of pure ignorance. To you 'who cares' folks though - come on! - It would be a MAJOR thing to have a new or different or more accurate photograph of Joseph Smith. No, it doesn't matter on a spiritual level, but your 'who cares' comments matter even less. - Rather than being arrogant and ignorant, try contributing to determining whether or not it's legit. You'd do a lot better for the world with that approach.

to doubters | 1:16 p.m. March 20, 2008

Mr Spanish Fark...da!
You are going only by what many artists have depicted of him. Paintings are usually always magnified just a bit to bring out and magnify a persons looks a bit better unless someone is painting a distorted abstract. I think this picture is of the prophet Joseph Smith. Look a little closer.

MMS | 1:21 p.m. March 20, 2008

The Community of Christ released this image in the December 1994 Saints Herald magazine called "What Did Joseph Look Like?" the accompanying article by Ronald Romig offred an explanation of its origin and their efforts to authenticate it. I highly recommend reading it.

As to Joseph's physical appearance, historian Hyrum Andrus who wrote "Joseph Smith, The Man and The Seer" compiled descriptions of Joseph by his contemporaries in chapter one, "Joseph Smith the Man". The descriptions very closely match the daguerreotype in question.

Does It Really Matter? | 1:23 p.m. March 20, 2008

So if this really is Joseph, does it matter? And if it's not, does it matter? No, and...no.

In my opinion this isn't Joseph. His shoulders and physical frame aren't broad enough. It's been documented numerous times by those who knew him that Joseph was a fantastic wrestler and a skilled stick-puller; very athletic. This guy doesn't have that kind of frame. True, he's young, ie, "not a mature man" but he's also not 12 or 13. It's doubtful that someone's physical frame could change so much.

I personally think it would be cool to have an accurate photo of what Joseph looked like but without it, the Church is still true.

The caravan moves on....

Anonymous | 1:29 p.m. March 20, 2008

Who cares? Why does it matter either way?

Randall | 1:33 p.m. March 20, 2008

It should be possible using forensic techniques to determine with a degree of accuracy by comparing measurements from the photograph with those of the death mask. but in the long run: what does it matter?

Observer | 1:46 p.m. March 20, 2008

Other than the fact that any photo-like image of Joseph Smith, Jr., would have to show a man no younger than 35 years old and probably about 37, while the person in this photo looks about 25 to me, and that the facial structure, particularly the cheek bones, and the placement of the ears, doesn't look much of anything like the non-photo images known to be of Joseph Smith, and that shoulders and neck don't resemble those of an atheletic person as Joseph Smith was described to be by many observers and that there is no provanance for the item, at all, for the photo I'd say there's a pretty good chance the photo is Joseph Smith, Jr.

I'd also say that the publishers of any book on this photo couldn't buy the kind of advertsing they have received.

I'd also say it would be nice of the headline writers for the Dnews would be a little more careful about what they write.

I'd also say that it is awfully hard to prove a negative -- but, what do I know?

Ernest T. Bass | 1:53 p.m. March 20, 2008

Looks more like a photo of my nephew, Ben.

To Irritable grumps! | 1:53 p.m. March 20, 2008

To you people out there who say: WHO CARES?, WHAT DOES IT MATTER? or IT ISN'T HIM!! And to the rest of you and your many negative, irritable, and grumbling comments... I say to you!!... No body cares as well to hear from you or have to say! If you don't like the picture than DON'T LOOK at it!

No this BABY | 1:55 p.m. March 20, 2008

is like WHITE ON RICE! It isn't him , he was better looking than that!

Kitenoa | 2:06 p.m. March 20, 2008

Whoever is shown, it is a nice photo!

Simon Jones | 2:23 p.m. March 20, 2008

If this is genuine, it is the only known true image of Joseph Smith.
As a professional photographer, it would be valuable for several million people around the world who would want to see, so as to look upon their esteemed Prophet, to view his image as he truly was. Images are powerful. They help to effect lives, but not on their own. Images can ADD TO what we already know. A good, true image can give a sense of joy and satisfaction when taken in, part of the purpose of photography and art.
If there were a single photograph of the Son of God, I don't think many would say "So what?" Almost all, if not ALL the world would want to look upon it, and retain His image in their mind.

Ken Baguley | 2:25 p.m. March 20, 2008

I hate to say this about Joseph the III...He is homely by comparison to this photo and any other depiction of Joseph Jr. It ain't him.

iluminar | 2:46 p.m. March 20, 2008

Pray about whether this is an actual picture of Joseph Smith?

How about just doing our hometeaching for this month, instead? I think the Lord wants us to do things to build up the Kingdom and not just speculate about things that are not as important.

Have we actually seen a REAL and VERIFIED picture of the Savior? NO, WE HAVE NOT! Does that make a difference as to our beliefs and acitivity in the Church? It does not, and neither should this.

What! | 2:50 p.m. March 20, 2008

He's better looking than Brigham Young! Young was the one with the belly!

SB | 3:01 p.m. March 20, 2008

My first reaction to this image was, "Nah!" This person doesn't have the bone structure of the death mask I've seen, the cheekbones, the big, wide-set eyes and the rosebud shaped lips that mask we know is Joseph Smith has. But then, of course, he wouldï¿½ve been lying on his back for the mask and I guess there had been trauma to his face after he was shot and fell. There are many pictures of Brigham Young from his younger years that don't look a whole lot like him either. I think that I've decided, like many others, that it doesn't really matter, but then again, it kind of does. I would love to know what Joseph Smith looked like-really. It makes him more "alive" to us and more accessible, maybe. It's fascinating to stare at this image and wonder, but I have a feeling that the guy in the photograph had no idea he would be the center of so much debate 160 years or so after it was taken-even if it is the Prophet. I guess we'll see.

CougarKeith | 3:14 p.m. March 20, 2008

Why wasn't my first comment about James 1:5-6 or Moroni 10:4-5 posted? That was a reasonable comment. Was it to challenging? It is the fact of the matter and I didn't say it was or wasn't Joseph Smith Jr. My personal feeling is it is Joseph Smith III, at this point in time. Then again I need to follow my own advice I suppose.

Evidence? | 3:16 p.m. March 20, 2008

Since when do you need evidence to prove something about old Joe Smith? Your on a slippery slope if you want to start applying physical proof to the man, church, and doctrine. Love and kisses folks.

Cros | 3:19 p.m. March 20, 2008

Yep, this picture bears a strong resemblance. Two ears, a nose, mouth, hair, old fashioned suit. Can only be one person. What more proof could we need?

historybuff | 3:29 p.m. March 20, 2008

That is my great-great-great-great uncle, LeGrande. He had a lot of problems with drink.

ONE OR TWO | 3:26 p.m. March 20, 2008

One or two people on the other side of the veil are have a GOOD LAUGH at this one!~

ONE if the photo IS Joseph Smith Jr. he must think it's funny that his own people thought he looked as different as he does in the picture.

TWO if it's some other guy who is probably having a good laugh with Joseph because they look nothing alike and all these people think they do.

Carl | 3:38 p.m. March 20, 2008

I of course don't know whether it's Smith or not, but I have a few things to consider.
1. What was considered "athletic" in the 1800s would probably not be so today. Even looking at photos of athletes from the 1970s indicates that athletes are more broad-shouldered that they once were.
2. Smith was not likely as handsome as the Church pamphlets make him out to be. The pattern seems to be very plain-looking men as Church presidents. Aside from Brigham and David McKay, I can't think of any other handsome prophets (of course Moses was handsome in "The Ten Commandments"!)
3. This man looks to be in his 20s, although there are some men in their late 30s who look in their 20s.
4. The style of dress looks consistent with a photo of Brigham taken in 1851. I don't think fashions, especially in the West, would change quickly.
I would be very curious to see how computer-assisted imaging from the death mask would compare to this photo.

Connie | 4:03 p.m. March 20, 2008

Praise to the man! It is our beloved Prophet Joseph Smith. WOW! we now have a genuine photograph of him. This is so wonderful!! :) It's just how I imagined him.

Dayel Przybyla | 4:04 p.m. March 20, 2008

I like your artical, It is really cool that you found a picture of Joseph Smith thank you for wriring

kevin | 4:12 p.m. March 20, 2008

Let's remember that he combed his hair in such a way as to cover up scars on his forehead. Clearly this is not the case in this photo...

DMH | 4:18 p.m. March 20, 2008

So if the picture is Joseph Smith, does it make him any more divine? NO, he is still just a man.

wxfan | 4:20 p.m. March 20, 2008

typical blog so many experts too few facts
too many people with virtually nothing to say

so

GO JAZZ! beat the lakers tonight! (this makes as much sense as any thing here so why not!)

fyi I don't base my testimony on alleged pictures that may or may not have been taken within ten years of the time the prophet lived.The reporter trying to imply that the church is trying to suppress this picture for some reason needs to take some journalism classes or put his article under the letters to editor/opinion section.

Gertrude | 4:33 p.m. March 20, 2008

Oh, good grief! The word "quell" certainly did get me to read this story -- and probably to sell A LOT of newspapers! That, after all, is what reporting is all about! Did we forget for a minute?

Aaron T, | 5:04 p.m. March 20, 2008

I'm going to pray about it tonight and then inform desNews when I get an answer...
Unless someone beats me to it.

truth | 5:12 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.

wallyworld | 5:18 p.m. March 20, 2008

I bought a "Photo" of Joseph Smith from an LDS bookstore that came matted and it said this photo was taken of him when Joseph Smith was running for President of the United States. The photo I have and this one look nothing alike. It would be cool to have a real photo of him like we do of the other Prophets, maybe one day we will. But I know and believe that when we do see him again we will KNOW that he is THE PROPHET.

HUH? | 5:22 p.m. March 20, 2008

Kevin, the photograph is so blurred...give me a break! That makes NO SENSE! However, it does look like him nonetheless. The paintings of him are not exactly accurate either. I will depend on the photograph over the paintings. They all resemble him one way or another

IL resident | 5:55 p.m. March 20, 2008

My uncle told me that photography was invented after Joseph Smith's death. Does anyone know if that is true?

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.