Interesting old photos
Posted by: Cbr600 on 28 May 2013
thought it was time i posted a new thread. here are some interesting old photos, that show some iconic moments, or are simply thought provoking. This is not intended to compete with the nice photo thread, and is not listed for its high quality images, just a series of old and interesting images.
Hippo cart in 1924. The hippo belonged to a circus and apparently enjoyed pulling the cart as a trick
Charlie Chaplin in 1916 at the age of 27
Suntan vending machine, 1949
Annie Edison Taylor (1838-1921), the first person to survive going over Niagara Falls in a barrel. She did it in 1901 because she needed money, and after doing it said she wouldn't recommend it to anyone!
Only known authenticated photo of Billy the Kid,ca. 1879
Jack Delano also took pics for the OWI and FSA but perhaps fewer of the portrait styles. Still used light well though...
Those are awesome Kuma. Beautiful. Would love to learn to reproduce those Kodachrome tones from my digicam!
There'll be an app for that. Seriously, though:
1) Can we really appreciate the old analogue colours when viewing on a computer? Yes, our eyes have a remarkable ability to adjust to picture colours and tones, even in a limited colour space (gamut) like a computer display or photographic emulsion.
2) Are camera sensors better or worse than computer displays? If the camera can capture everything the monitor can display, then logically, for display on a computer monitor, we can reproduce "any" old colours as well (or better) from a digital image than we can from a slide or negative even if the digitization of the old image is "perfect". Any additional colour range present in the analogue image will be lost, if not when digitized, then when displayed. You're no better off than you would be starting with a digital image in the first place.
The key to old-timey looking photograhs (IMO) is simply the imagination of the person controlling the editing. If you can imagine it, and have the technical skills, the medium is not the problem (provided you are happy working within the limits of computer monitors' display limitations).
There is a comment on the web-page (on a computer - shock) where a guy says he hates digital, but these images/colours are wonderful. Ironic, much?
I agree with everything you've said above Winky. I think these images are so dramatic, especially for their age, is because of the 4"x5" format used. They are beautifully detailed.
Steve
They sure are. A bit too staged for my taste, but very interesting nonetheless. The detail is apparent, even when looking at them on a computer screen. Large-sized photographic reproductions (or even hi-res digital prints!) would be very nice, I'm sure.
Does anybody know where this is.
Venice - The church of Santa Maria della Salute - shot form an unusual angle (possibly from atop the bell tower of another church the San Giorgio Maggiore I think)
Thanks Sniper.
How didn't I realise it was Venice with all that water about. I've probably sailed past it in one of those floating buses.
"Measuring bathing suits in the early 1920s. If they were too short, the women would be fined"
With legs like that, I'm not surprised...
Those are awesome Kuma. Beautiful. Would love to learn to reproduce those Kodachrome tones from my digicam!
There'll be an app for that. Seriously, though:
1) Can we really appreciate the old analogue colours when viewing on a computer? Yes, our eyes have a remarkable ability to adjust to picture colours and tones, even in a limited colour space (gamut) like a computer display or photographic emulsion.
2) Are camera sensors better or worse than computer displays? If the camera can capture everything the monitor can display, then logically, for display on a computer monitor, we can reproduce "any" old colours as well (or better) from a digital image than we can from a slide or negative even if the digitization of the old image is "perfect". Any additional colour range present in the analogue image will be lost, if not when digitized, then when displayed. You're no better off than you would be starting with a digital image in the first place.
The key to old-timey looking photograhs (IMO) is simply the imagination of the person controlling the editing. If you can imagine it, and have the technical skills, the medium is not the problem (provided you are happy working within the limits of computer monitors' display limitations).
There is a comment on the web-page (on a computer - shock) where a guy says he hates digital, but these images/colours are wonderful. Ironic, much?
Winky
Doesn't your final comment contradict point 2).
The colours/details do look wonderful, even with my budget monitor and basic graphics card. The high quality of the originals is definitely not being masked by a basic monitor.
Originally Posted by Kevin-W:This famous picture ("Sadness") was taken by Julia Margaret Cameron way back in 1864 but it has a very contemporary feel I think.
Kevin,
That's amazing that it was taken in more than 200 years ago. It's got that 70s David Hamilton feel.
For one thing, it is very unusual that the subject is not looking into the camera for this period. ( everyone looked like a cigar store Indian in the photograph in those days )
Regarding the Kodachrome look, Alien Skin offers the Exporsure 4 Extension to Photoshop or Lightroom. I mean it's never gonna be like a real McCoy, tho.
This one mimics the Kodak Ektachrome
There's something about analogue film that is so dense and colourful even when they are black and white compared to today's digital photos. Digital camera and lenses got much better in last 20 years but not sure if they actually surpassed the analogue photography.
Not quite the same but - these remind me of the unreal beauty of the re-released 70mm transfer from Technicolor of 'Vertigo'.
http://www.rogerebert.com/scan...aming-in-technicolor
NOTHING could have prepared me for its impact - once again on the big screen.
I prefer the B&W and processed colour slant over any accurate reproduction of 'things'.
Oh yes. It is terrific in a glorious Technicolor, isn't it?
Interestingly Hitchcock later goes back in B&W with Psycho which I think has more impact than if it were made in colour. The shower scene is bloodier than any Technicolor can produce.
Here's another interesting colour photo from the past:
Hugo Jaeger was a personal photographer for Adolf Hitler.
He sold all of his colour photograph of Nazi Germany and Hitler photos to Life Magazine in 1965. Recently for the first time Life.com published some of the photos.
It is indeed unusual since I haven never seen Nazi Germany photos in colour. They are not colorized but some of them look a bit fake. They bring a text book history much closer. Frightening in a way but these are good reminder that hope we never repeat this again. Photo journalism can keep us honest sometimes.
Testing new bulletproof vests, 1923
A mom and her son watch the mushroom cloud after an atomic test 75 miles away, Las Vegas, 1953
Walter Yeo, one of the first people to undergo advanced plastic surgery. His eyelids were damaged in World War I, and he got a skin transplant to replace them.
Illegal alcohol being poured out during Prohibition, Detroit 1929
Austrian boy receives new shoes during WWII
It wasn't that long time ago. A powerful shot by Gordon Parks.
God - those Nazis were really up themselves.
Perhaps an argument for pink velvet military uniforms - although .....
The Ford Theater, where Abraham Lincoln was assassinated
Children eating their Christmas dinner during the Great Depression: turnips and cabbage
Annette Kellerman promoted women's right to wear a fitted one-piece bathing suit, 1907… She was arrested for indecency
Princeton students after a freshman vs. sophomores snowball fight in 1893
Martin Luther King Jr. with his son by his side removing a burnt cross from his front yard, 1960
'Testing new bulletproof vests, 1923'
Good work if you can get it.
Originally Posted by Kevin-W:This famous picture ("Sadness") was taken by Julia Margaret Cameron way back in 1864 but it has a very contemporary feel I think.
Kevin,
That's amazing that it was taken in more than 200 years ago. It's got that 70s David Hamilton feel.
For one thing, it is very unusual that the subject is not looking into the camera for this period. ( everyone looked like a cigar store Indian in the photograph in those days )
Regarding the Kodachrome look, Alien Skin offers the Exporsure 4 Extension to Photoshop or Lightroom. I mean it's never gonna be like a real McCoy, tho.
This one mimics the Kodak Ektachrome
Thanks Kuma, they both look quite interesting - although, as you say, they're no substitute for the real thing. There's a free trial so I will give them a go - the software is quite prcey at $199.
Yes, the JMC "Sadness" pic never fails to amaze me - can't believe it's 149 years old.
PS - This is a great thread. Thanks for starting it Paul.
PS - This is a great thread. Thanks for starting it Paul.
Just think Kevin. In a few years, people will be googling your images and posting them on a similar thread. Keep up the GREAT work !
PS - This is a great thread. Thanks for starting it Paul.
Just think Kevin. In a few years, people will be googling your images and posting them on a similar thread. Keep up the GREAT work !
Yes, the JMC "Sadness" pic never fails to amaze me - can't believe it's 149 years old.
Oops.
"Math class is tough." - in my Barbie voice.
Cbr600,
You must have discovered Retronaut.com?
Perhaps an argument for pink velvet military uniforms - although .....
Could have been the inspiration behind Mel Brook's 'Springtime for Hitler' number in The Producers.
Don't be stupid, be a smarty. Come and join the Nazi party
Love this photo of the war photographer Lee Miller in Hitler's Munich bathtub, taken by her lover David Scherman at the end of the War.
France, 1938.
From the King of Leica users, HC-B: