Talking porttraits/photographs

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 104666

Meri wrote:
> Well, you've hit on just one of the things that hopefully JKR will 
> explain in her HP encyclopedia that we all hope she will publish 
> after book 7. Anyway, I would assume that a witch or wizard would 
> have to sit for a portrait, and that some sort of spell would be 
> cast to transfer a semblance of the subject's personality to the 
> painting (see Mrs. Black in Order). If someone did a portrait of 
> Lilly and James now I don't think that Harry would be able to talk 
> to them, because there'd be no live subject to get the personailty 
> from. Photos on the other hand, are seemingly just moving, enchanted 
> pictures that are developed in a special potion to allow the 
> subjects to move. So presumably a Muggle roll of film developed in 
> the right potion would produce moving pictures as well. Though as 
> evidenced in both Order (when Percy walks out of the family photo) 
> and CoS (when Harry tries to escape the picture of him and Lockhart) 
> the subjects retain some rudimentary knowledge of their real person. 
> So, yes there are some inconsistencies. Anyway, just two knuts...

Carol:
Also Percy's girlfriend Penelope hides behind her frame when Ron
spills water on the photograph and blotches her nose (PoA), and
Dumbledore walks out of his chocolate frog card (SS/PS). The portraits
in the chocolate frog cards may not be photographs (unless wizards had
cameras in the days of Circe or even Merlin ;-)  ), but the cards
can't talk and they act more like photos than like painted portraits.

Carol