31–40 of 109 posts
edit: I should note, the article now links to a better-behaved site.
It's actually nice to see people smiling in these old photos. Something that was absent in posed photos of those days.
I was thinking the same. I wonder if he knew them or they are strangers. I grew up in a village and if you saw someone, even if you didn't know them (although you knew most people), you'd say hello, but it's strange to imagine that happening in a city today.
Also: Indeed, very nice to see people smiling in that time! I wonder how much the grim-looking portraits we know add to the cliche of hard-ship and sadness we have of earlier times.
Then, having to look that way when being portrayed may stemmed from who were the earliest people being portrayed: Saints, Kings and Queens.
It's actually nice to see people smiling in these old photos. Something that was absent in posed photos of those days.
Whenever I see pictures from the pre-WW1-era I marvel at the shoes people wore back then. From the outside they appear comfortable, sturdy, and elegant. I wonder which would be more comfortable to wear -- hand-made, customized shoes from a 1900's-inspired, experienced shoemaker, or modern, mass-produced sneakers (which are pretty comfortable to begin with).
Whenever I see pictures from the pre-WW1-era I marvel at the shoes people wore back then. From the outside they appear comfortable, sturdy, and elegant. I wonder which would be more comfortable to wear -- hand-made, customized shoes from a 1900's-inspired, experienced shoemaker, or modern, mass-produced sneakers (which are pretty comfortable to begin with).
Yes, and the clothes. Okay, I know by many statistical measures we're wealthier now. But those clothes would cost a fortune now. Do they have fewer outfits? Are we only seeing the elite?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking the same. I wonder if he knew them or they are strangers. I grew up in a village and if you saw someone, even if you didn't know them (although you knew most people), you'd say hello, but it's strange to imagine that happening in a city today.
Looking at the pictures it seems that they were taken exactly in the moment of greeting the photographer (People with their hands on hats...). The way the function of the camera is described, using the gestures of greeting someone may have nicely helped in keeping his camera a secret. Also: Indeed, very nice to see people smiling in that time! I wonder how much the grim-looking portraits we know add to the cliche of…
That certainly might have contributed to the lack of smiling, yes. From sources I have long since lost, it is my understanding that portraits were expensive, and photographs were serious business. Add to that the fact of...umm, why do we smile for photographs again? I do it because everyone else does. Build a time machine, and someone from the 1800s is going to ask, "why does everyone in your photographs look like a smiling idiot? Was there a rash of some brain-eating disease in your time?" I've also heard the theory based on exposure times, but by the very late 1800s exposure times had dropped dramatically. Though it could be argued that not smiling was a carry-over from the days of long exposure. Again, though, documentation I've seen simply said, "that's just how it was done".
Fashions change, just like we don't wear corsets anymore (well, I don't; but I don't judge), now we smile for pictures.
Whenever I see pictures from the pre-WW1-era I marvel at the shoes people wore back then. From the outside they appear comfortable, sturdy, and elegant. I wonder which would be more comfortable to wear -- hand-made, customized shoes from a 1900's-inspired, experienced shoemaker, or modern, mass-produced sneakers (which are pretty comfortable to begin with).
Yes, and the clothes. Okay, I know by many statistical measures we're wealthier now. But those clothes would cost a fortune now. Do they have fewer outfits? Are we only seeing the elite?
EDIT: I suppose the photographer might have preferred better dressed subjects, too.
Nice pictures. But... what happened to using img size tags? The page is very hostile to the viewer since if you start browsing the pictures, it keeps adding photo elements as they load, making it impossible to actually read anything or view the photos until all the images have loaded. Seems to happen a lot to me these days. edit: I should note, the article now links to a better-behaved site.
Declaring image sizes doesn't fit into the distributed model that is that is the rage these days, so I guess people don't care since it's so hard. At least it makes their ms/req numbers look great, nevermind that the experience for the actual users sucks.