15 ms·
Russia in color, a century ago
- Adlai 14y agoSurprisingly good quality, considering his method. You get the best sense of his method when it goes a bit wrong, in photo 27: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_century_ago.html#photo27 http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_c... My favorite picture is #15, the cathedral: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_century_ago.html#photo15 http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_c...
- daeken 14y agoWhat's most interesting to me, personally, is the water in these photos. Because the water is constantly moving, capturing the filtered images repeatedly won't work -- you end up capturing different images for RGB. That's what gives you that really neat rainbow effect; it looks like oil in a rainpuddle. Edit: You can see some of this in photo 18 where the stems of the flowers were presumably moving very slightly: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_century_ago.html#photo18 http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_c... Edit #2: I just realized that I've used the same exact "effect" in demo code. I had a function in a shader that would generate a pixel color given a time value; I ran it three times for each pixel with a slightly different time value and then grabbed an R/G/B from each of them. You ended up with the same exact rainbow effect that was subtle when motion was limited and extreme when high speed motion was occurring. Not that that adds a ton to this thread, but I got a kick out of it.
- vhf 14y ago>Because the water is constantly moving, capturing the filtered images repeatedly won't work -- you end up capturing different images for RGB. You're right, of course. But don't forget that the shutter speed was very low on these images. It would have harmed if the shutter speed was high : short exposure time of quickly moving water would have given very different water images for RGB. When exposing longer, motion blur makes the water seem to flow, becoming soft and blurry.
- Xcelerate 14y agoWhat amazes me the most is how good the quality is. These photos are better than those from my smartphone, and they're over a century old! I do wonder how well he was able to view his own photos. One thing that struck me was how much "nature" there is. The cities seems quite a bit smaller and more contained than they do today.
- artursapek 14y agoI'm sure he was able to view them well using a projector. Displays like that were the initial purpose of photography like this. Positives of these would have overlapped to make up the same images you see here. By the way, I think it's sort of a shame to even compare smartphone digital photos to film photography. Of course they look better.
- derleth 14y ago> Of course they look better. Why?
- delinka 14y agoBecause 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 volume in a sound recording only 44,100 times per second. But a magnetic tape has a resolution limited only by the number of molecules passing the recording head every second (the more [i.e. the faster the tape], the better.)
- artursapek 14y agoExactly
- parallel 14y agoThe 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. Sound recordings on vinly are similarly limited by other factors. To "read" the signal from a record groove a needle is dragged a needle through a v shaped groove. This needle jiggles up and down and left and right, hence the two channels in stereo. The time resolution of the signal (max frequency) is limited by the physics of the jiggling head. It's inertia prevents it from reading signals over a certain limiting frequency. Again, well before the molecular level. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain [edit] - Changed momentum to inertia in the last paragraph.
- mgkimsal 14y agoNo 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?
- daeken 14y agoIt's very difficult to hold a smile very, very precisely. Any movement would've meant the colors would smudge. Not necessarily the reason why they're not smiling, but it's a possibility, I believe.
- mgkimsal 14y agoAgreed, but holding any pose is a challenge - kids sitting on the hill - they'd fidget and move. The water moves. The sun moves if you wait long enough. I wonder how many 'bad' photos there are from the early days of photos where people tried smiling and they had smudged faces.
- emiliobumachar 14y agoI see a ghost in the smallest kid apart from the others in the hill. Changed positions between filters.
- bradddd 14y agoThat's exactly it. The exposures were much longer then than now. It's also the same reason the bodies of water have the rainbow effect on their surfaces.
- dredmorbius 14y agoThat chromatic effect is specifically the result of different intensities of light tracing different paths across a highly variable reflective surface (water) to the slightly different locations of each of the three separately filtered lenses of Prokudin-Gorskii's apparatus. It's an effect of space, not time.
- twelvechairs 14y agoNote 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/prk2000002550/ http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/prok/item/prk20000025....
- dkroy 14y agoHonestly, 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.
- vhf 14y agoI wouldn't call it "technology". It's more of a successful experiment than technology, to me. 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.)
- MichaelApproved 14y agoThis is indeed technology. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/technology http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/technology
- knowtheory 14y agoI don't think the distinction you have made is valid. Experiments are a kind of technology by any common definition. Just because this never rolled out into mass production doesn't mean that it wasn't a systematic application of scientific/engineering principles.
- 001sky 14y agoAu Contraire. Its not clear <you> are able to distinguish technique from technology. And even if so, how much proportional impact is technique vs. technology. And even then, and in this case in particular, ex-post-facto how much technology and/or technique have been applied to put these images online.
- markiel 14y agoThis 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/ http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/
- sukuriant 14y agoAs many times as we're happy to recall the impressive technical feat of the original artist, or as long as we're fascinated by what life looked like a hundred years ago. The max of those two.
- JshWright 14y agoI've probably seen this set of images half a dozen times. I still find myself scrolling through the whole set every time it pops up. It's really a stunning set of images, and absolutely worth enjoying more than once.
- bcl 14y agoPreviously seen 749 days ago: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1621517 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1621517
- alecperkins 14y agoI was first amazed at the quality, then surprised that these were taken more recently than I expected, in 1910. Then, I realized that, duh, that was 102 years ago. It's strange how even 100+ years ago is getting more and more recent. (Obviously, that's how it works. But perception lags quite a bit.)
- cek 14y ago> It's strange how even 100+ years ago is getting more and more recent. I think you are absolutely right with this. As the rate of change increases (and it has been rapidly increasing for the last 150 years) it makes sense that history would compress too. Fascinating!
- olavk 14y agoI don't think the rate of change increases. In just a few years after these pictures Russia will be involved in WWI, then revolution and civil war. After than Stalin, then WWII. Millions and millions of people will have their lives changed and shattered by these enormous changes. Sure, today we get a new cell phone model each year, but I don't think this kind of change is as bag as e.g. revolution and world war.
- dusing 14y agoI used to always think the 80's were 20 years ago.
- diziet 14y agoStrangely enough most of the photos now would not be considered those of Russia, but would be other distinct countries.
- azernik 14y agoYup - the series is titled "Travels in the Russian Empire", and it really was a multinational empire back then.
- photorized 14y agoLooking at these feels like time travel.
- derekp7 14y agoIt's funny, I got the exact same impression. Normally when you think of the past, you think of black & white, or faded color. But if you took a ride in a time machine, of course the past would look as vibrant as anything you currently see. As a side note, I've noticed that when TV programs show a film clip from 30 years ago (say the early 80's), such as old sporting event clips, they add a false color fade to make the clip look old -- even though most of the film clips (and any non-film based storage) from that time would not have suffered such degradation.
- photorized 14y agoExactly. These don't look "old", there is no retro feel to them, especially with the landscapes. Messes with your head.
- keiferski 14y agoJust think: in 50-100 years, the phrase "100 years ago" won't mean that much, in terms of technology.
- thematt 14y agoReally? Why do you suppose? In 50-100 years, I can easily see us having a permanent presence on another planet, fully automated vehicles and a Terminator like military comprised completely of robots. That world (if true), technologically, would look amazingly different than how we live today.
- keiferski 14y agoOkay, maybe a better word choice would have been "certain" technologies. Seeing photographs of the 50s in 2050 won't seem all that amazing.
- kalleboo 14y agoUnless we figure out how to create realistic full-color 3D holograms, or at least highly-improved glasses-free stereographic displays. In that case, anything pre-stereography will look very "flat", and the relatively few stereographic photos taken today could have the same impact as these color photos from the article
- michaelkscott 14y agoAnother planet in our solar system? Sure. But even the nearest planet beyond our Solar system is about 11 light years away. And getting there anytime soon is an unfeasible goal according to Physics. Perhaps the Earth would be different 50 to 100 from now, but I wouldn't bet too much on any exciting activity going on outside of our planet.
- jl6 14y agoSci-fi has trained us to expect all the things you mention so when they arrive we probably won't feel that anything much has changed.
- 14y ago
- leak 14y agoLooking at their faces, no one seems happy. Not a single smile in any photo including those of kids. Kinda depressing.
- vsviridov 14y agoWell, they have to maintain their pose and expression for 3 consecutive shots. If you look at old daguerreotypes people have really weird expressions in them as well, because they had to be still for long time.
- verelo 14y agoThis makes me realized how amazing it will be having tools like Instagram, having captured millions of photos, in around 100 years from now.
- georgemcbay 14y agoI have mixed feelings about that. Millions of recent GPS tagged photographs floating around in the cloud have some incredibly cool technical potential when combined with something like PhotoSynth, but culturally I think ubiquitous photos actually weaken the historical impact. To loosely stick with the Russian theme, a peek into a single moment in the life one person 100 years ago is fascinating, but a million peeks into a single moment in the life of a million people 100 years ago is just data.
- sonnenkiste 14y agoWill all these Instagram pictures be there in 100 years? What happens if Instagram shuts down?
- ollysb 14y agoI've always found it interesting that people's perception of history is coloured(couldn't resist) by having only seen it in black and white. You almost have to remember that the world wasn't actually in black and white 100 years ago. It's fascinating to see photos from that far back in colour, it somehow makes it easier to empathise with the people in the shots.
- akkartik 14y agohttp://www.freewebs.com/calvin-hobbes-org/dadbandwandcolour.jpg http://www.freewebs.com/calvin-hobbes-org/dadbandwandcolour.... Makes the world back then seem more modern, forces me to take it more seriously. The past is a different place, not stupider or more primitive, just different.
- bergie 14y agoAnother good one is seeing ancient Greek and Roman statues in the colors they had and not just dull, white marble http://www.smithsonianmag.com/multimedia/photos/?device=android&articleID=19828084 http://www.smithsonianmag.com/multimedia/photos/?device=andr...
- diggan 14y agoThese statues are painted afterwards and is probably not the "true" colors.
- keyle 14y agoI did see that, in 2010. And the title misslead me to think of something new. Could we please tag titles appropriately? ie. (2010)
- ilamont 14y agoI love the fact that these photos capture a landscape without cars. It is especially striking in the shots of cities. Imagine what it would look like if a photo of the same locations were taken now -- more pavement and cars, fewer trees.
- kbolino 14y agoActually, you might be surprised about the tree part. Take a look at Tbilisi then and now, and you'll see more trees now.
- jackflintermann 14y agoCS129 (Computational Photography) at Brown actually has students reconstruct these same photos as its first assignment. It's not too hard, and a good introduction to image alignment. Check out the assignment at http://www.cs.brown.edu/courses/cs129/asgn/proj1/ http://www.cs.brown.edu/courses/cs129/asgn/proj1/
- derrida 14y agoI notice they have a picture of Tblisi (http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/prokudin_08_20/p05_00004434.jpg http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bi...) , which is now in Georgia (not Russia). Tblisi is a rather beautiful looking place, here is a recent picture from almost the same place http://www.experience.hk/wp-content/uploads/Tbilisi-4.jpg http://www.experience.hk/wp-content/uploads/Tbilisi-4.jpg
- shawnc 14y agoThese are so amazing. The world wasn't sepia toned a hundred years ago! As silly as that statement is, my brain is actually having a hard time really believing these photos are from 100 years ago. I'm in awe.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoSo goes the joke: "Dad, why are there only black-and-white photos from before the early 1900s?" "Because you see, son, the world actually was black-and-white back then." "Then why were there colour portraits?" "Because you see, son, artists were insane."
- lysol 14y ago^ Calvin and Hobbes
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoAh, thank you, I didn't know the source.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- diggan 14y agoOriginal, slightly longer: http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/calvin-father-on-black-and-white-pictures.gif http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/calvin-father-on-bla...
- agumonkey 14y agoI saw a hi-res version of this film two days ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeF4HXCq5z0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeF4HXCq5z0. It was almost anachronical. Low res. jittery black and white movies makes everything look obsolete.
- shawnc 14y ago
- lisnake 14y agoI come from the place where majority of these photos were taken (Ural mountains). Here is comparisons of landscapes on these old photos with current view — http://ufa.livejournal.com/2259613.html http://ufa.livejournal.com/2259613.html http://ufa.livejournal.com/2248707.html http://ufa.livejournal.com/2248707.html http://ufa.livejournal.com/2248073.html http://ufa.livejournal.com/2248073.html Actually, in my opinion, not much have changed
- capkutay 14y agoThe locations of these photos are pretty significant to the etymologies of many groups of people, spanning from modern day Turks, Koreans, Japanese, and even Native Americans. (at least some people have proposed this). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altaic_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altaic_languages
- guard-of-terra 14y agoCan you be more clear? Because I see a lot of photos from caucasus, urals, middle east and not much Siberia.
- sonnenkiste 14y agoHow can I vote a news down? Because this isn't "news". I've seen it two years ago. Really great pictures, but no news ...
- corford 14y agoIf you enjoyed those and don't know who Albert Kahn is, you should also check out: http://www.albertkahn.co.uk/photos.html http://www.albertkahn.co.uk/photos.html http://www.albertkahn.co.uk/about.html http://www.albertkahn.co.uk/about.html There's a small museum in Paris dedicated to his work (situated on the grounds of Kahn's old estate no less) which is a wonderful experience if you're ever in Paris and looking for something cultural to do that's a bit off the beaten track. It's on the end of the metro line and is an oasis of calm compared to the typical Louvre pandemonium :) Edit: found the link to the museum: http://albert-kahn.hauts-de-seine.net/english/ http://albert-kahn.hauts-de-seine.net/english/
- intenex 14y agoSo, apparently smiling in pictures is a relatively new trend?
- zwischenzug 14y agoI don't know if this was the case here, but in other pictures of the time people didn't smile so much in photos as the slow shutter speed meant they were more likely to blur, as a smile is harder to maintain than a neutral expression.
- combataircraft 14y agoThis is not Russia!
- johnohara 14y agoPicture #30: Clicking the Google Map link shows three bridges that cross the river today. The center bridge appears to be the one from the photograph. Those stone piers are beautiful and my guess, still fully functional 100 years later.
- aritraghosh007 14y agoWonderful ! Wonder how many of these historical remains are still present in Russia? Would love to visit the country once.
- kghose 14y agoCan any one post a link to the equipment details - design/description, anything? Thanks.
- azernik 14y agoOne question - was the artist himself capable of reassembling the monochrome frames into a color picture, or did he just take the pictures and stick them in an archive until someone could develop them properly? EDIT: Answered my own question - apparently, the slides were originally intended to be projected together (with differently-colored lights) onto a wall, as color prints were too expensive.
- ekianjo 14y agoOld - this was already linked on HN a while ago I believe. But if you haven't seen it, it's nice.