You could be right. The photo is pretty blurry and very blotched and
yellowed so the retouching wouldn't have required much artistry.
Chuck Norcutt
On 3/10/2012 12:21 PM, Piers Hemy wrote:
> Granted I haven't seen the photo, I would venture that it was not "captured
> on film" but "painted on paper" using retouching ink. Photoshop has much to
> answer for, part of which is the assumption that before Photoshop there was
> no way to 'improve' a photo. I have seen, nay held in my own hands, prints
> from a national newspaper (which I think is respected for not bending the
> truth) bearing the most obvious evidence of gross re-touching to accentuate
> the lines of the lapel on a dark suit jacket - as one instance that sticks
> in my mind. The intent was to make the image reproducible using the
> newsprint technology of the day - letterpress printing at maybe 30dpi!
>
> So my vote - no shutter speed mystery at all!
>
> Piers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 10 March 2012 12:34
> To: Olympus mail list
> Subject: [OM] A shutter speed mystery
>
> Yesterday we went with some friends to Fort DeSoto Park for a picnic and a
> bit of beach lounging.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Desoto>
>
> While a very large public park today, Fort DeSoto was originally constructed
> between 1898-1906 as a coastal defense battery to protect Tampa Bay. If you
> scroll to the bottom of the page linked above you'll see some of the
> artillery and mortars originally installed here and at Fort Dade a short
> distance away. With 12" bores the mortars are rather impressive beasts.
> They were first fired in 1903 and were deactivated not later than 1917.
>
> In a long corridor of historic photographs of the guns and emplacements
> there is one very faded shot of two mortars being fired at the same time.
> Much to my amazement the projectiles of both guns are clearly visible
> perhaps some 30 feet above the muzzles. According to the details I've been
> able to find about these guns the muzzle velocity ranges from about 1,000 to
> 1,500 feet/second depending on the weight of the projectiles whose length
> ranges from about 3-4 feet.
>
> Now the shutter speed mystery. How was this photo taken? At 1/500 second
> the projectiles moving at 1,000 feet/second move 2 feet or 4 feet at 1/250
> second. The angle of view from the camera's position probably creates some
> foreshortening of the projectiles but it *appears* to me that the shutter
> speed would have been not longer than 1/250. I don't know whether shutters
> of the period operated that fast but, even if they did, I don't know how it
> would have been captured on a film emulsion of the time.
>
> So, how was this photo taken?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|