What to Do With a Box of Unlabelled Photographs

The box is usually in a closet, and it has been in a closet for a long time.

Inside there are several hundred photographs, some in albums with adhesive that has gone brown, some loose, some in the paper envelopes the developer handed over in 1974 with the negatives still tucked in the flap.

Almost none of them are labelled. The ones that are say something like “Mom and the girls, Easter,” in handwriting nobody can identify, with no year.

The reason nobody deals with it is not laziness. It is that the job has no obvious first move and no obvious end, and every time somebody opens the box they end up sitting on the floor for an hour looking at pictures and then putting the lid back on.

The order that works

Stabilise, sort roughly, label, scan, organise. In that order, and the order is the whole method.

Most people invert it. They start by trying to organise chronologically, discover they cannot date anything, get stuck, and stop. Organisation is the last step because it depends on information you do not have yet.

The one part with a genuine deadline is labelling, and it depends entirely on people. Everything else can be done in ten years. Identification cannot.

So if anybody who might recognise a face is elderly or unwell, skip straight to labelling and come back to the rest.

Stabilise

Before anything else, stop the damage.

Get the box out of the garage, the attic and the closet against an exterior wall. Heat and humidity are what destroy photographs, and in Florida a garage is an oven with a cycle of condensation attached. Inside the air-conditioned part of the house, on a shelf, is enough. This is not a project requiring archival storage; it is a project requiring a different room.

Take photographs out of magnetic albums, the ones with the sticky backing and the plastic film. That adhesive yellows and eventually bonds to the print. If a photograph does not lift easily, leave it and deal with it later or not at all, because forcing it removes the emulsion.

Keep the envelopes and anything written on them. A developer envelope often carries a processing date, which may be the only date you get.

Keep the negatives. They hold more detail than the prints made from them and they take up almost no space.

Do not throw anything away at this stage. You are not qualified to decide yet, and neither is anybody else.

Sort roughly

Rough means five or six piles, not a filing system.

Sort by whatever is obvious. Clearly old versus clearly recent. Formal studio portraits versus snapshots. One identifiable household versus another. Holidays and occasions versus ordinary days.

Resist the urge to be precise. The purpose of this pass is to make the box navigable so that somebody looking at it with you is not overwhelmed, and to surface the pictures that are obviously important.

Use shallow boxes or envelopes and write on the container, never on the photograph.

If you must write on a print, use a soft pencil on the back, at the edge, and press almost not at all. Ballpoint indents through to the front and marker bleeds.

Label, and do it with somebody

This is the step that matters and the step with a clock on it.

Take a stack of photographs to the person most likely to recognise faces, put the phone on the table recording, and go through them one at a time.

Record the session instead of writing as you go. You will get names, and you will also get the stories the photographs unlock, which is the part you want and the part that does not fit on the back of a print. A photograph of four people at a picnic table will produce five minutes about who was not speaking to whom that summer.

Number the photographs lightly and speak the number aloud as you hold each one up. Then the recording maps onto the pile without you having to transcribe anything in the moment.

Ask what is happening as well as who it is. Where was this, what were they doing there, whose house, what was the occasion, who took it. The photographer is the family member missing from every photograph, and nobody thinks to name them.

Do several short sessions instead of one long one. An hour with photographs is tiring in a way an hour of conversation is not.

This pairs directly with recording a parent or grandparent about their life, and in practice the two jobs turn into one job, which is the efficient way to do both.

Dating a photograph when nobody remembers

Even with nobody left to ask, most photographs can be placed within a few years, and the clues are almost never the subject.

The format is the first bracket. Print sizes, borders, scalloped edges, square instant prints, the shift from black and white to colour in ordinary family snapshots, and the colour shift as older colour prints go warm. None of these date a picture precisely and all of them narrow it.

Many prints carry a processing date stamped on the back or the border, which most people never turn over to check.

Then cars, which are the most reliable object in any street scene, because a car model dates the photograph to no earlier than its production year and people are usually driving something a few years old.

Then appliances, televisions, telephones and whatever is on the kitchen counter. Then hairstyles and clothing, which are less precise than people assume but useful in aggregate.

Then the building. If you know the address, a photograph of the house before or after a known alteration brackets the year immediately.

And then the people. Ages of children are the best internal clock in any family collection, because if you can date one photograph confidently you can date every other one containing the same child.

Scan the ones that matter

Not all of them. That is the mistake that stops the project.

Several hundred photographs at high resolution is a weekend you will not spend, and the result would be a folder nobody ever opens. Scan the ones that carry a person, a place or a story, which is usually a fraction of the box.

Scan at a resolution high enough to enlarge and print, which for a standard snapshot means considerably higher than screen resolution. If in doubt, higher, since rescanning is worse than over-scanning.

A flatbed scanner produces better results than a phone. A phone in good indirect light produces results that are entirely adequate and that you will finish, which makes it the better tool for most people.

Name the files with something searchable at the point of scanning. A name, a rough year, a place. A folder of files called scan001 is the same problem as the box, transferred to a hard drive.

Store copies in two places, one of them not in your house. Florida gives you an annual reason to take that seriously.

What the photographs are worth as evidence

More than most people realise, and the useful detail is rarely the subject.

The subject is posed and dressed for the occasion. The background is not. Look at the room behind them, the furniture, what is on the walls, what is on the table, the make of the car at the kerb, the state of the street.

Clothing dates a photograph more reliably than anybody’s memory. So do cars, appliances and hairstyles, and all of them are in the frame incidentally.

That is the same discipline that makes a commercial archive so valuable to researchers. I have written about it at length in the piece on the twenty thousand Burgert Brothers photographs of this region, where a studio photographing a storefront also captured the pavement, the signage and whoever was walking past.

Your box works the same way, at family scale. The picture of a birthday is also a record of a kitchen that no longer exists.

What to do about duplicates and the ones nobody wants

Every box contains three categories people freeze over.

Duplicates, because prints came in batches and somebody ordered doubles for thirty years. Keep the best copy and one spare, and pass the rest to other branches of the family, who have nothing.

Photographs of nobody. Landscapes, buildings, a beach, a car, taken for reasons lost forever. These are worth more than they look, because they date and place the rest of the roll, and a photograph of a street is sometimes the only surviving image of a house. Keep a sample.

Photographs of people nobody can identify. These are the hard ones, and the honest position is that some will never be identified. Keep them anyway, scanned and numbered, because an unidentified photograph is a question somebody else in the family may be able to answer, and because identification sometimes arrives decades later from an unexpected direction.

What genuinely can go: blurred frames, duplicates beyond the spare, and prints so damaged the image is gone. Everything else stays, because storage is cheap and regret is not.

And before anything leaves the house, offer it round. A cousin who has never seen a photograph of their own grandmother exists in most families.

Organise, finally

Now that you know who and roughly when, organisation becomes possible and takes an afternoon.

Chronological is the obvious structure and it is usually the wrong one, because gaps look like failures. By household or by person tends to read better and matches how anybody looks through them in practice.

Write the identifications down somewhere besides the recording. A simple document listing the numbers with names and notes is enough and will outlive any software.

Put the originals back in the house, not the garage.

And tell somebody else in the family what you have done and where it is. A perfectly organised archive that only one person knows about is one house move away from being a box in a closet again.

Slides, film and the formats you cannot see

Half the boxes in this county contain something that needs equipment nobody owns any more.

Colour slides are the commonest. Thousands of them, in carousels or little yellow boxes, from a period when slides were how ordinary families photographed holidays. Nobody has a projector, so nobody has looked at them in forty years, and they are in better condition than the prints because they were stored in the dark.

Hold one up to a window and you can see enough to sort. Scanning them properly needs a scanner with a transparency unit, or a service, and it is worth doing for a subset.

Negatives are the second, and people throw them away constantly because they look like waste. They are not. A negative holds more detail than any print made from it, and it is the only surviving version of a photograph whose print was lost.

Home movie film on small reels is the third, and it is the one with the most urgency, because acetate film degrades in a way that is eventually irreversible and heat accelerates it. If there is film in a Florida garage, moving it indoors today is the single highest-value thing in this entire piece.

Video tape is the fourth and the trap, because people assume it is modern and safe. It is not. Tape formats from the eighties and nineties are already difficult to play and the tapes themselves deteriorate.

The order of urgency runs film, tape, slides, negatives, prints. Which is almost exactly the reverse of the order people deal with them.

What this turns into

A book, usually not the one anybody planned.

The labelling sessions produce audio. The audio produces stories. The stories are attached to images, which means you end up with something rarer than a family history: a narrative with pictures that are identified, dated and explained.

That is a considerably better artifact than either half on its own, and it is the thing grandchildren read.

The step that makes it possible is the one with the deadline. (See also the county archives that collect exactly this material) Everything in this piece can be done in five years except sitting down with the person who knows who is in the picture.

Frequently Asked Questions