Miss Vintage Box Oshi Shikigami I was going to say that it looked like a very good copy of what a 1919 photo should look like. Something in it isn't right to be original. Is it the contrast Oshi, too good to look original?
To put it simply, I would say yes. There is a lot of science and some math to 'prove the point', but I will try and keep it simple.
All photographic film, especially the film of the era, has a limited "dynamic contrast range". That is, how bright becomes pure white, and how dark becomes completely black, with any one exposure. A good contemporary film has a range of about 1000 to 1. In about the turn of the century, it was quite a bit less.
Perhaps some of you have noticed, when taking pictures through a window; either the outside was exposed correctly ( light and dark), or the inside was... But not both? This is what I am talking about.
In this picture, we have details in the dark side of the cat, and the girl's gown. However, we also see details (out of focus) of the outside as well. Also the curtains have detail, even though the light of day is shining through their lace.
Even if 'flash powder' was used (too early for flash bulbs) the balance is very good. Flash powder was a lot better than no 'flash' but, very underpowered by todays even modest flash units. Further, if any form of flash was used, there is no evidence of this as a 'hot spot' in the window glass.
With today's digital imaging processes, it is possible to painstakingly match two exposures (outside light and inside) and come up with a composite image that has details in both. However, this was certainly not available back then.
So, to be blunt. In my estimation, this is not an original from the date stated. If any wish to know more details on this, I am quite happy to address, or redirect you to the specific details of all the above.
Oshi; Member of The Society of Photographic Finishing Engineers, and a Certified Photographic Councilor.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this so fully and directly. Because of your very good information and the fact that it originally was thought to be genuine by an upstanding member of our community. It is a good photographic lesson in how not to be taken by someone trying to sell you Photoshop images for Antique images. I am also happy to know that my instinct on this was correct even though I didn't quite know what bothered me about it. I can see now that you pointed it out that if the light is coming in from the outside the inside is too bright for that kind of camera equipment, and as you said there is not light distortion in the photo from a flash pan.
Love it when this kind of conversation takes place here. Thank You.
Very nice handling of photo contrast, coming from 1919.
ReplyDeleteJust did some research, it might not be from 1919.
ReplyDeleteA quality photo for the period, it's lovely.
ReplyDeleteVery sweet!
ReplyDeleteMiss Vintage Box Oshi Shikigami I was going to say that it looked like a very good copy of what a 1919 photo should look like. Something in it isn't right to be original. Is it the contrast Oshi, too good to look original?
ReplyDeleteTo put it simply, I would say yes. There is a lot of science and some math to 'prove the point', but I will try and keep it simple.
ReplyDeleteAll photographic film, especially the film of the era, has a limited "dynamic contrast range". That is, how bright becomes pure white, and how dark becomes completely black, with any one exposure. A good contemporary film has a range of about 1000 to 1. In about the turn of the century, it was quite a bit less.
Perhaps some of you have noticed, when taking pictures through a window; either the outside was exposed correctly ( light and dark), or the inside was... But not both? This is what I am talking about.
In this picture, we have details in the dark side of the cat, and the girl's gown. However, we also see details (out of focus) of the outside as well. Also the curtains have detail, even though the light of day is shining through their lace.
Even if 'flash powder' was used (too early for flash bulbs) the balance is very good. Flash powder was a lot better than no 'flash' but, very underpowered by todays even modest flash units. Further, if any form of flash was used, there is no evidence of this as a 'hot spot' in the window glass.
With today's digital imaging processes, it is possible to painstakingly match two exposures (outside light and inside) and come up with a composite image that has details in both. However, this was certainly not available back then.
So, to be blunt. In my estimation, this is not an original from the date stated. If any wish to know more details on this, I am quite happy to address, or redirect you to the specific details of all the above.
Oshi; Member of The Society of Photographic Finishing Engineers, and a Certified Photographic Councilor.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this so fully and directly. Because of your very good information and the fact that it originally was thought to be genuine by an upstanding member of our community. It is a good photographic lesson in how not to be taken by someone trying to sell you Photoshop images for Antique images.
ReplyDeleteI am also happy to know that my instinct on this was correct even though I didn't quite know what bothered me about it. I can see now that you pointed it out that if the light is coming in from the outside the inside is too bright for that kind of camera equipment, and as you said there is not light distortion in the photo from a flash pan.
Love it when this kind of conversation takes place here. Thank You.
PS. Impressive credentials. Thank you for telling us.
ReplyDelete