St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> Damn, those guys sure would use those guns if you messed them about.

  You bet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 8 Mar 2008 12:09:30 -0500, Warp wrote:
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/HatfieldClan.jpg
>
>   Even though this is just a posed photo (and they have clearly suited up
> for the photo instead of being their casual clothes) you can still read a
> lot from the photo when you really start to examine it. It can excite your
> imagination a lot if you study it long enough.

"We and our guns!"
Even the brat on the right edge is carrying a gun.
And he's pointing it at the private parts of the mustache man
on the right edge...

-- 
Joel Yliluoma - http://iki.fi/bisqwit/

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   I apologize for the more blog-style posting, but...
> 
>   Somehow I find some old photographs to be really fascinating. The older
> the photograph, the more fascinating. For example, consider this photograph
> taken in 1897:
> 

I ran across this someplace - I believe someone posted a link here 
several years ago.


http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/


Tom

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Besides which, I can't imagine that mirth and frivolity are modern 
> inventions.  People have been laughing for as long as there have been 
> people :)

Except for a camera, it seems.  OTOH, it was a novelty and somewhat 
rare, so they probably thought it'd be good for posterity to come out 
seriously in a photo than laughing like a mad dog.  Perhaps people began 
to take photos less seriously at around the time Einstein showed the 
tongue. :)

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> Is it not because, getting your photograph taken was a *serious* thing that
> happened only occasionally.

yes, I just came to that conclusion in the post above... :P

Post a reply to this message

Tom Austin wrote:
> I ran across this someplace - I believe someone posted a link here 
> several years ago.
> 
> http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/

Truly amazing!  Color photos from way before Technicolor! :)

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> 
> Truly amazing!  Color photos from way before Technicolor! :)

I recently saw a printed scan (=just a photo scanned in 48-bit colours 
and printed, *no* serious enhancing between) of a photo from late 
1800's. It had light, but clear colors, you could surely see them.

Then I saw the original photo, it was in black and white. That's one 
reason why old B&W photos are so much more living than digital B&W 
-photos, they aren't really B&W, they have *a lot* of shades which still 
hold some of the color information, even though it's not clearly visible.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen, ja cie krence.
Nie lepiej Maniek Mamuci Maniak?

> Then I saw the original photo, it was in black and white. That's one 
> reason why old B&W photos are so much more living than digital B&W 
> -photos, they aren't really B&W, they have *a lot* of shades which still 
> hold some of the color information, even though it's not clearly visible.
>
Robb Kendrick's photos comes to mind.
Well, his photos are contemporary, but technology - as old as photography... :)
< http://www.robbkendrick.com/ >

Slawek
-- 
  ________ 
_/ __/ __/ Watch your step!
 \__ \__ \_______________________________________________________________

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> I was exaggerating it to the point of absurdity, of course :)  I 
> remember hearing that they had long exposure times, but I don't remember 
> exactly what they were. 

I recall reading that the original photographs took several minutes to 
expose. Long enough that photographers had chairs with little sticks 
with pads on them to hold your head still while you sat.


-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message 
news:47d5025e@news.povray.org...
> St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>> Damn, those guys sure would use those guns if you messed them about.
>
>  You bet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud

     Meant to say Warp, thanks for that link, I did read it when you posted 
it. Good reading. Explains a lot with the image.

     In all honesty, those guys were just looking after their property imo, 
(forget the pig, that was just some excuse along the way), the same would 
happen now if you tried to invade your neighbours house (for whatever reason 
that would be!) - they'd kill you if they could. (I think it's legal now in 
the UK with justifiable cause to do this). Not sure though.


       ~Steve~



>
> -- 
>                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message