Question for NY people

[FedoraFan112390]

Hi

For (older) people who lived in NY around the 1960s and 1970s and were of driving age, how were Driver License photos handled around that time? Were they taken on the spot like today, or at an earlier date than when the license was issued? Also, why would some driver licenses say "Not Valid Until Stamped" (say in 1975) and yet older ones (like 1972) looked almost digitally printed and didn't say that at all?
This is the last question I'll be asking for a while. Sorry.

 

[warbird]

Until the 1980's many states still didn't even have pictures on their licenses.

 

[FedoraFan112390]

Until the 1980's many states still didn't even have pictures on their licenses.

Well, I know for a fact NY had License Photos in the 1960s, and even in the 50s (at least for Taxi Licenses) but I don't know how they went about taking the photos.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

License's are standardized, state wide. Warbird was right - NY didn't start putting pictures on their licenses until the 80's. I got my first NY license WITHOUT a photo as well as finding one of my great-grandmother's from the 50's that had no photo too. Now, hack medallion - aka taxi - licenses are different; they are a business license. And, usually, they are issued by the city in conjunction with a valid state driver's license - although a special state driver's license is needed to drive a taxi or limo or bus. But, again, they didn't have photos.

Hope that helps.

 

[FedoraFan112390]

License's are standardized, state wide. Warbird was right - NY didn't start putting pictures on their licenses until the 80's. I got my first NY license WITHOUT a photo as well as finding one of my great-grandmother's from the 50's that had no photo too. Now, hack medallion - aka taxi - licenses are different; they are a business license. And, usually, they are issued by the city in conjunction with a valid state driver's license - although a special state driver's license is needed to drive a taxi or limo or bus. But, again, they didn't have photos.

Hope that helps.

Oh. Because we found some of my grandpa's driver licenses from 1966, 1969, 1972 and 1975 (his year of death). All of which were standard NY State Licenses (License Class Chauffeur until his last one--which said License Class 4). He was a resident of NYC and all of his had (black and white) photos, albeit taped or stapled on the area which said "Place Photo Here". He also had a hack license from around 1949 or 1950 (it said it was good until 1952) which also had a photo. What was odd is his licenses from 1966, 1969, and 1975 all said "Not Valid Until Stamped" or "Not a License Until Stamped" at the bottom and were all stamped with a date and the emblem of the NY DMV and a code of some sort (IE, the 1969 License, which experied in May 1969 was stamped "July 25 1969''). The only one that looked anything like a modern license was his 1972 license.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

Oh. Because we found some of my grandpa's driver licenses from 1966, 1969, 1972 and 1975 (his year of death). All of which were standard NY State Licenses (License Class Chauffeur until his last one--which said License Class 4). He was a resident of NYC and all of his had (black and white) photos, albeit taped or stapled on the area which said "Place Photo Here". He also had a hack license from around 1949 or 1950 (it said it was good until 1952) which also had a photo. What was odd is his licenses from 1966, 1969, and 1975 all said "Not Valid Until Stamped" or "Not a License Until Stamped" at the bottom and were all stamped with a date and the emblem of the NY DMV and a code of some sort (IE, the 1969 License, which experied in May 1969 was stamped "July 25 1969''). The only one that looked anything like a modern license was his 1972 license.

The only thing I can guess is that it was only the State issued Chauffeur/Class 4 licenses that required the pictures. Regular ones did not. The first license I got, in 1980, was a blue card with my name, date of birth, address, etc. and Class of driver. Even my temp license, back in 91, was a stamped piece of paper with no picture. I remember getting stopped in Oklahoma on a cross country drive and showing the temp to the trooper, who then gave me a ticket because he didn't believe it was a license! Gotta love NY!

 

[pgoat]

The old licenses had a cartoonish print pattern of antique autos.

I believe i got my first picture license in 84 or so. that was quite an ID pic I was stuck with - a grizzly adams beard, plus I had just cut and dyed my hair orange, so that was hard to forget

 

[Doctor Strange]

As others have said, only taxi/chauffeur licenses (not ordinary "class 5" licenses) requried photos until about 20 years ago. When picture licenses became standard in NY, they began being done on-site at the DMV as they are today. (At first on film, and it took longer to get your final license in the mail.) Before that, most license photos were done by pro photographers.

As it happens, we did b/w license photos in my parents' little commercial photo studio - they were a good sideline to make a few bucks on walk-in business. There were official standards to follow on size (not just overall size, but head size within the overall size), and flat lighting was required.

We used to shoot them on 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 Tri-X sheet film, using a reduction back on a gigantic, circa-1910 Ansco 8x10 camera. Lighting was from two big WWII-surplus flourescent fixtures on either side, with a floodlight aimed on the white background behind the subject for definition and as a hair light. We'd move the camera back and forth and measure them to approximate size on the groundglass when shooting, then contact-print the negatives and trim them to final size.

We usually had a one-day turnaround (in those days, we needed time to develop and dry the negs, make the prints, and then wash and dry them). We charged around $7.50 for a set of two back in the mid-60s, which went up to around $12 or $15 by the time we stopped doing them in the 80s...

Anyway, you had to bring those pictures to the DMV to affix them to the license and get them stamped.

 

[FedoraFan112390]

As others have said, only taxi/chauffeur licenses (not ordinary "class 5" licenses) requried photos until about 20 years ago. When picture licenses became standard in NY, they began being done on-site at the DMV as they are today. (At first on film, and it took longer to get your final license in the mail.) Before that, most license photos were done by pro photographers.

As it happens, we did b/w license photos in my parents' little commercial photo studio - they were a good sideline to make a few bucks on walk-in business. There were official standards to follow on size (not just overall size, but head size within the overall size), and flat lighting was required.

We used to shoot them on 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 Tri-X sheet film, using a reduction back on a gigantic, circa-1910 Ansco 8x10 camera. Lighting was from two big WWII-surplus flourescent fixtures on either side, with a floodlight aimed on the white background behind the subject for definition and as a hair light. We'd move the camera back and forth and measure them to approximate size on the groundglass when shooting, then contact-print the negatives and trim them to final size.

We usually had a one-day turnaround (in those days, we needed time to develop and dry the negs, make the prints, and then wash and dry them). We charged around $7.50 for a set of two back in the mid-60s, which went up to around $12 or $15 by the time we stopped doing them in the 80s...

Anyway, you had to bring those pictures to the DMV to affix them to the license and get them stamped.

So that would explain why my grandfather's last license photo (1975) looks like a professional one:

 

[bigshoe]

I was issued my first lic. in 1966 it was sans photo. In 1971 I got my hack licsence. To get it you had to go to downtown Manhattan to the Hack Bureau.It was just like a scene out of "The Naked City", every thing had been painted NYC serene green, no air conditioning, unwashed windows wide open for some air. Lots of old guys smoking cigars with bad adittudes.:rage: After taking the test you had your picture taken just like a mug shot with a small board that had sliding white numbers. You then had to go change your license at the MVD to a class 4.
Tom

 

[Senator Jack]

So how's the book coming along, FF?

 

[FedoraFan112390]

As others have said, only taxi/chauffeur licenses (not ordinary "class 5" licenses) requried photos until about 20 years ago. When picture licenses became standard in NY, they began being done on-site at the DMV as they are today. (At first on film, and it took longer to get your final license in the mail.) Before that, most license photos were done by pro photographers.

As it happens, we did b/w license photos in my parents' little commercial photo studio - they were a good sideline to make a few bucks on walk-in business. There were official standards to follow on size (not just overall size, but head size within the overall size), and flat lighting was required.

We used to shoot them on 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 Tri-X sheet film, using a reduction back on a gigantic, circa-1910 Ansco 8x10 camera. Lighting was from two big WWII-surplus flourescent fixtures on either side, with a floodlight aimed on the white background behind the subject for definition and as a hair light. We'd move the camera back and forth and measure them to approximate size on the groundglass when shooting, then contact-print the negatives and trim them to final size.

We usually had a one-day turnaround (in those days, we needed time to develop and dry the negs, make the prints, and then wash and dry them). We charged around $7.50 for a set of two back in the mid-60s, which went up to around $12 or $15 by the time we stopped doing them in the 80s...

Anyway, you had to bring those pictures to the DMV to affix them to the license and get them stamped.

Just a few questions--what is flatlighting?

Also, the license below was stamped "May 30 1975"--the day the license was renewede, and a day before the previous license expired---Yet at the top it says "MV-2 (3/74)"--Any idea on what that means? Was the license mailed to my grandpa in March '74, and then he just waited and got it renewed when his previous license was ready to expire? The reason I ask because my mother and I are trying to figure out around when was the photo on the license taken--My family wasn't taking a lot of pictures in the 70s, so there's literally no pix of my grandpa the last two years of his life and so if the license photo was taken in '74 or '75 it's literally the last photo of him alive, as he died in '75.

Last question---what kind of lighting/focus/etc was done on this photo, from what you can see?

 

[Doctor Strange]

Flat lighting means putting lights on the left and right of the subject aimed in at 45%, with neither one being closer or with a larger bulb, so that the light is absolutely even - i.e., flat. Not dramatic like the lighting in a portrait; a license picture should be a simple mugshot devoid of anything approaching art.

The "MV-2 (3/74)" indicates that this license is DMV form MV-2 with a revision date of 3/74. Everything here - except for the glued-on picture and typewritered-in personal info on the other side - existed on a preprinted form that was then filled in: you must forget the modern world, where everything is spit out of a computer printer from beautiful what-you-see-is-what-you-get PDF files! Things like this were forms that got manually filled in by the DMV personal.

The lighting looks like it's even from both sides, without a third light behind the subject illuminating the background (which would have made the two shadows less obvious - we used to do this). And the light's not that harsh (that is, includes strongly defined shadows), so I'm guessing that it's from "hot lights" (incandescent bulbs, likely 500-watt bulbs in reflectors, or reflectorfloods) vs. electronic flashes.

 

[FedoraFan112390]

Flat lighting means putting lights on the left and right of the subject aimed in at 45%, with neither one being closer or with a larger bulb, so that the light is absolutely even - i.e., flat. Not dramatic like the lighting in a portrait; a license picture should be a simple mugshot devoid of anything approaching art.

The "MV-2 (3/74)" indicates that this license is DMV form MV-2 with a revision date of 3/74. Everything here - except for the glued-on picture and typewritered-in personal info on the other side - existed on a preprinted form that was then filled in: you must forget the modern world, where everything is spit out of a computer printer from beautiful what-you-see-is-what-you-get PDF files! Things like this were forms that got manually filled in by the DMV personal.

The lighting looks like it's even from both sides, without a third light behind the subject illuminating the background (which would have made the two shadows less obvious - we used to do this). And the light's not that harsh (that is, includes strongly defined shadows), so I'm guessing that it's from "hot lights" (incandescent bulbs, likely 500-watt bulbs in reflectors, or reflectorfloods) vs. electronic flashes.

Ok. Would the light have made some colors seem lighter than in real life; for example if the subject had light hair or gray hair would it made it have appeared white?

Also, whereas a previous license of his (from '72) has all of the info on the front printed computer-esque, even the DMV logo; this license (along with the others) says "Not Valid Until Stamped" and has the date of renewal and the DMV logo stamped on:

What's with that?

\