Retro Cool
-
Looks like the photos were taken on the Britannia Terrace causeway just outside Porthmadog.
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=52.92176,-4.116794&spn=0.001688,0.005284&t=h&z=18 -
Also known as The Cob.
-
Ironclads
@unknownuser said:
Ironclads were steam-propelled warships protected by armor plates. The rapid pace of change in the ironclad period meant that many ships were obsolete as soon as they were complete.
-
I'm not sure if this is the proper topic but... enjoy, scifi-retro-cult lovers
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=andromeda+nebula&oq=Andromeda+Nebula&aq=0&aqi=g1&aql=&gs_sm=1&gs_upl=2315l2315l0l6960l1l1l0l0l0l0l250l250l2-1l1l0And this one. A bit out of topic but I could not resist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXP4r8M3eGc -
1954 Volvo TP21 “Sugga”
-
Either retro cool or retro frackin' crazy!
And this one I am sure everyone has seen before.
-
-
Nice find, urgen:
A similar vehicle was built back in the 1960's for use in oil exploration in marshland. It had a large rectangular deck and long pontoon screws. I remember the demonstration film shot with an elevated camera, showing how it could easily move left, right, circles, etc. -
That old tractor is very cool. I'd love to have one. This winter it would sure churn up the mud, though.
Eric, that guy hanging from the beam looks like an early PhotoShop job.
-
Lovely tractor
Eric, both photos look like an early Ps work.
The first one, well known photo, it's obviously a montage. See environment around figures.
I won't discuss on the second one. Obviously a montage, once again. -
I am not so quick to discount those images. I can't say for sure about the officer hanging on but surely the one by Charles Ebbets is authentic.
@unknownuser said:
This 1932 photo by fearless photographer Charles C. Ebbets shows workmen eating lunch on the 69th floor of the GE Building during the construction of Rockefeller Center. The photo was originally published in the New York Herald Tribune. Notice that the worker on the far right is holding what looks like a liquor flask. I guess it gets chilly up there.
@unknownuser said:
Were these men, whose feet were dangling hundreds of feet above New York’s streets, out of their minds? Because, really, who will eat lunch on a hanging girder and, consequently, who would be courageous enough to take a picture during the Rockefeller Center’s construction – on the 69th floor?
This legendary photograph which portrays 11 workers having a lunch break defines the career of an American photographer, Charles Ebbets. In 1932, Ebbets was the photographic director of the building’s construction. He took this famous photo in September of the same year and shortly after, it was published in the New York Herald Tribune.
This became one of the photographs that changed the world. It was adopted by pop culture and has so many versions to date. Some of these were humorous renditions featuring Hollywood icons, the Muppets, and even the casts from F.R.I.E.N.D.S.
Here are a couple more of Ebbets famous photos.
And the man himself.
Now this one for sure is faked
-
..... Harold Lloyd...
[flash=600,400:l9pvexk4]http://www.youtube.com/v/Ik5ph6ChO9Q&feature=related[/flash:l9pvexk4] -
I came across the LEGO variant a few weeks ago - found a high-res version which I'll make into an A2 print on aluminum.
-
Ebbets famous photos.
I know, they may be authentic in some way, some of them.- Can you please, explain the halo lighting around some figures? This indicates editing.
- In some of these photos, watch the DOF, inconsistency? Yeah, the front buildings are in focus, same the figures that are very close to camera.
Anyway retro cool.
My favorites
-
Keep in mind that in those days, the air in the cities was a whole lot thicker than it is these days. Lots of coal being burned and no regulations on pollution.
Those images are on some larger format film--notice the camera in the hands of the photographer. Probably 4x5 or possibly a 5x7 camera. Hand holding a camera like that means he was probably not focusing it on his subjects but just setting the focus more by guess. He'd know the depth of field range for the aperture he's using and set the focus so his most distant subject is near the far end of the range. I expect the halo at the center of the images is probably due to issues with the lens, shutter and the aperture. A leaf shutter opens from the center outward and at high (relatively speaking) shutter speeds, the center of the image receives more light than the edges.
-
@Dave R
I love these old cameras, I know what you mean but this isn't the case.
There's a halo around the figures. Not an aperture neither a vignette effect. It's definitely a retouching. If it's a hoax, I can't be sure. -
@michaliszissiou said:
@Dave R
I love these old cameras, I know what you mean but this isn't the case.
There's a halo around the figures. Not an aperture neither a vignette effect. It's definitely a retouching. If it's a hoax, I can't be sure.It could also just be a darkroom thing - if the print was made by burning and dodging around the figures, the background around them would be blown out.
-
See, on the last photo I posted, Lenin and Molotov. Around Molotov's figure there's a halo too. Very common on old photos. Adopted from oil painting technics.
However, you may think that it's another fake photo and you may be right. We weren't there. Photos aren't real documents, always, they never were. Long time before Ps. -
I did some reading up on "Lunch atop a Skyscraper," and it was interesting. The photographer wasn't identified until fairly recently. Although staged, the photo wasn't faked. The halo you see are actually clouds in the background, they are so high up. Also, unkown to viewers, there is a roof surface a few stories below, so if they fell they wouldn't have had too far to go.
I remember seeing film of steel workers on skyscrapers. It seemed to defy logic (and prudence) to be so high up and walking on such narrow steel beams, before the age of safety harnesses, but they did it.
-
Michel, looking at the photos of Lenin with and without Molotov, what jumps out immediately is that the second image has less resolution, so it's hard to compare the two. It appears there is a lot of light reflecting off the river, and possibly off the white wall in the background. I wonder if what you are seeing as a halo is not a lot of reflected light behind the figure.
Advertisement