31–40 of 196 posts
No one is smiling. Not even the kids. Maybe the woman in #20 is, who knows? I know in general 'old time' photos didn't have people smiling much - very posed pictures and stoic expressions. I wonder if they had any idea how much this would color our impression of them 100+ years later?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were black and whites taken with color filters over the lens (R, G, B). Project each of the three in its corresponding color and overlap them to produce a full-color photo. Overlap them in that color in Photoshop to produce the digital images you see here.
How would you project them in their corresponding colors, though? I'd imagine you would have to produce prints in the colors. Only other thing I can think of is to project the negatives with R/G/B colored light behind them and make those projections line up.
This had been in the "news" for the past 5 years if not longer. How many times can it makes the frontage? ;) http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you project them in their corresponding colors, though? I'd imagine you would have to produce prints in the colors. Only other thing I can think of is to project the negatives with R/G/B colored light behind them and make those projections line up.
Colored lanterns is how he projected them in color, according to the article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because film captures details in molecules while a CCD sensor in your digital camera uses picture elements much, much, much larger than molecules. Or, because it's analog. It's very similar to sound recordings. Whether magnetic or not (say, in vinyl) the resolution of the captured signal can approach the molecular. Digital has a discreet resolution limited by the capturing equipment; for example, CDs reproduce the vo…
The spacial resolution of analog photographs is not at the scale of individual molecules. It is limited by the "grain" of the film [1]. Other factors include distortions from lens shape imperfections in the lens material. Audio tapes record their signal in magnetic domains. These are areas of tape the are large enough to be written and read. Much larger than anything approaching the scale of individual molecules. Sou…
Note that those shown are all heavily restored (also cropped) versions of the originals. They are all from the Library of Congress collection (~1900 of the ~3500 he made). An example of an unrestored version for comparison is at http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/prok/item/prk20000025... .
Honestly, even those in the link are impressive to me. Just think of where technology was at that point in time, and what ingenuity it took to create pictures of this quality.
Color separation cameras came two decades after, and this was really a technology : making one camera capture at the same time 3 pictures on negative. (Where those very impressive pictures shown in the link are taken using the color separation process but without a color separation camera, and not on negative.)
Just think: in 50-100 years, the phrase "100 years ago" won't mean that much, in terms of technology.
Just think: in 50-100 years, the phrase "100 years ago" won't mean that much, in terms of technology.
I can't imagine what will change even in the next 10 years, let alone the next 50-100 years.
No one is smiling. Not even the kids. Maybe the woman in #20 is, who knows? I know in general 'old time' photos didn't have people smiling much - very posed pictures and stoic expressions. I wonder if they had any idea how much this would color our impression of them 100+ years later?