NEW WAVE OF NOIR; Doing it how they did it(1920's-1940's).

[Big Man]

There have been questions asked regarding the authenticity of this 1947 photo.

This could still be Classified... So don't repeat it.

During WWII there were 2 (two) Ultra-secret project Dreamed up by Albert Einstein. The first one was the “Manhattan Project” and the second one the “Way Back Project”.

After the 1st A-Bomb was dropped, The “Manhattan Project” was made Public.
However, the “Way Back Project” stayed a secret until an Assistant of Dr Peabody’s slipped the Story to TV.
The Government immediately took steps to discredit the story by creating The Rocky and Bullwinkle show..

So with that in mind, please understand me when I say that there was no Time Travel program working in 1947……….

I hope this explains the Filtered cigarette, the color photo and the Blackbird

Hey, that story makes more sense than what the government is telling us these days ... [huh]

 

[Lone_Ranger]

You might have to explain the photo of the SR71 in the background however!

Quick! Photoshop in a B&W pic of the "Dragon Lady." The U-2 would fit the time period better.

 

[Caparzo]

....Film Noir

 

[suitedcboy]

Bravo! Caparzo.

Great job with that period film poster!

 

[vitanola]

You make some excellent points, DerMann. One or two things that would like to address:

Making it blurry most certainly doesn't do it, as most, if not all, vintage pictures I've seen have stunning focus and clarity, yet not in the same way modern digital images look.

Absolutely right! Remember that most vintage photographs were contact prints made form large format negatives, and are for all practical purposes grainless.

Vignetting was not usually done on purpose. Early (Victorian) cameras would often produce an image that was ovalish in shape because of a design flaw (don't quote me, going from memory).

VIGNETTING, as you call it, was a popular technique in the late 'seventies and early 'eighties. In earlier times this effect was often due to limitations in the photographic equipment, but after the early 'seventies it was generally the result of a consious choice on the part of the photographer. It is, of course entirely inappropriate for photographs which are intended to give the appearance of amatuer "snap-shots", with the important exception that the very earliest KODAKS (those dating before about '01 oe '02) were plagued with this defect. In the case of the Kodak cameras, this problem was often ameliorated by simply printing a circular image. SOME EXAMPLES:

Bu the 'seventies lenses could be pretty good, even by modern standards, but quality was EXPENSIVE.

The limitations were generally in the emulsions, which were SLOW 9about the equivilent of a modern ASA 4 to 10. Note that modern emulsions can have an ASA of up to 5000. We must also remember that , before the development of Panchromatic emulsions shortly after the turn of the last century, films were insensitive to red, yellow and orange light. these colors would "read' as light grey, rather than with their natural coloring. "Pan" film only became popular for snapshot work in the 'twenties, and so we muxct apply orthochromatic filters to our color photographs to give them a vintage appearance. The incorrect rendering of the grey scale is one of the tell-tale signs of a fake "antique" photograph.

The extreme depth of field that you have occasionally noticed amy well have been the result of the use of a pinhole rather than a lens. Pinhole apatures were a standard tool of the pre-1920 period, and were used when light conditions were appropriate, and when rxtreme depth of field wes necessary, such as in some architectural and landscape work.

Contrast was generally higher in vintage B&W images, too, but not to an extreme.

True for snap-shots, not quite as true of studio work. bu the 'seventies, photographers could manipulate the contrast level to suit their own taste.

Prodessional photographers would choose a "contrasty" image when preparing a photo fopr publication, aas such an image was better suited to the half-tone process. Since the bulk of our surviving archival images are form newspaper files, we tend to get the incorrect impression that all vintage photography was contrasty.

Lastly, stay away from the film grain and other filters (by themselves) on Photoshop. If applied in a certain manner, the filters can create a very convincing effect. Although it is nigh impossible to get it just right. This is more of a suggestion, but steer clear of sepia toned pictures. Most images are preserved and have not turned into a sepia colour. Again, I say this mostly because it has been done so often and usually in hasty and poor manner.

ABSOLUTELY! Back slowly away form the filters! Sepia, on the other hand is a different question. many, if not most original sepia photographs were "toned" with a solution of gold salts. Wen done well, this produces a surface of singular beauty, with fine flesh tones, which look almost real, and even the shadows are rich and vibrant. Wen done poorly, it simply looks like a badly fixed photograph.

Sepia toning should always be done with restraint. There was a breif vogue for sepia photographs in the late 'eighties and early 'nineties, but after this period the process was most commonly used of the rather self-consiously "artistic" images of the second rate art photographers.

 

[tinmanzzz]

Couldn't Resist

I found a great "prop"

more photos found here
http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?p=663653#post663653

 

[indycop]

....Film Noir

Is that your Tawny fed? I would love to see the color version of this!

 

[indycop]

I found a great "prop"

more photos found here
http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?p=663653#post663653

Just 2 questions, Is that SUV part of the way back project and where can I get that shirt?!

 

[tinmanzzz]

SUV ?????

Just 2 questions, Is that SUV part of the way back project and where can I get that shirt?!

If you are referring to the M-453A 1/2 Ton 4X4 Multipurpose Command Truck, No it is not part of the "Way Back Project".
It is, however, Part of a different project which I do not have the clearence to discuss here..lol
The shirt is a Tommy.

 

[univibe88]

Wonderful picture. Lots of attitude. The hat really seems to frame your face well. Is it vintage or custom? The hat has a very 20's feel to it. While the suit has a late 40's(maybe 80's) look to it. Thank you for sharing.

I am very impressed that you pegged Big Man's hat as 20's style when in fact he Art base it off his grandfather's hat from 1928. I'm sure it makes Big Man very happy also.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

Something I've noticed recently and haven't had time to play around with is that a cell phone picture has about the same crappy resolution...wait...vintage appearance as something taken way back when, or taken now and then fussed over in Photoshop or the like converting to B&W or sepia, and applying filters for grain and wear and so forth to "age" it. And especially those taken in somewhat lower light (not full sunlight at least) could just quickly changed from color to BW and really look vintage in a fraction of the time. Just a thought... There's a shot of, I believe, Kiltie on another thread (I think it might be What Hat Are You Wearing Today?) taken in the last week or so with a cell phone that if the color were removed from would look like a 40's shot.

 

[univibe88]

Interesting thought Mike. Let's check it out.

 

[Dr Doran]

Nice thread gents.

Now I'm thinking about stopping using sepia .... but it's become my trademark!

EDIT: I just stopped using sepia.

 

[Hat Head]

How's this?

A picture of me before my brother-in-law's beach wedding in Florida this spring.

 

[Dr Doran]

A picture of me before my brother-in-law's beach wedding in Florida this spring.

I love it.

 

[majormoore]

That is a killer look, this is what I would like to see more of, you nailed it as to what most men of the time wore day in and day out.

Major Moore

Well, if you're looking for "attitude" and a "vintage look", how about this? while it's not a suit, it most certainly is representative of what was seen a lot around here in the 1930's.

 

[Big Man]

That is a killer look, this is what I would like to see more of, you nailed it as to what most men of the time wore day in and day out.

Major Moore

Thanks.

 

[warbird]

 

[pplepic]

Vintage Duds

Great! You've certainly captured the "look" there. I don't have any threads that qualify, but I'm way old enough to remember how my dad dressed in the 30's.

 

[HungaryTom]