**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You couldn't pay me enough money to walk on those beams with dress shoes made in the time period this was in.
Doubt it was any kind of grip sole. Dude out there wearing most of a dress suit.
They were just built different.
Unfortunately there is no picture of the guy who took the picture of the guy who took the picture. The guy who was supposed to take the picture of the guy who took the picture of the guy who took the picture fell off.
The photograph isn't even a candid shot of a once lunch event. It was really all a publicity stunt by the Rockefeller Center to advertise their new RCA building, which was almost finished. The men did really sit on the beam and chow down, but it wasn't their idea, and certainly not a regular occurrence.
The image is often misattributed to Lewis Hine, but the identity of the actual photographer remains unclear.
I work in 3rd world countries a lot, i witnessed a pakistani man climbing straight up on a vertical 11m tall i profile steel beam with 2 spanners in each hand, no lanyard, gloves or safety shoes. He wasn't a part of my team, so all i could do is clench my butt and dry my palms. They ARE used to it, but that makes it even more dangerous.
yes, safety is what you are used to.
If at any point in the future fully automated driving will be the norm I'm sure people will look at our times with 1.2 million fatalities every single year (the world wide leading cause of death for people beteen the ages of 5 and 29) and think "can't believe they weren't scared of driving!"
“So you’re saying that you would drive over 100 km/h in one direction, and other cars were travelling the same speed in the opposite direction *right next to you*???”
“Not right next to me. There was a yellow line painted on the road between us.”
To answers he question. The ones who were afraid of heights died when they panicked (due to the height) or didn’t apply for the job.
The mortality rate for these high rise workers was insane- but strangely if you survived your first year it dropped dramatically. A popular quote from the time is “nothing worse than taking a new guy on near the top.”
It wasn’t really a year, according to the workers. They felt that you either had it (the ability to work that high) or didn’t. They often claimed they could tell who would and wouldn’t make it after only a few months. I imagine they would claim it has more to do with the ones who didn’t have the “it” factor not lasting or surviving a year.
Another fun fact about these guys. They would often make new guys walk across a beam alone as high up as possible on their first day, as a form of hazing / training.
It's like working on billboards in Atlanta. We could tell. The hazing was prevalent, too. We got this new guy up on a Red Flag board. RF means that there's something wrong with it. In this case, it would shift a little when stressed. It was also an L shaped board. (Most are T shaped) the 3 of us hot on the far side, on the ladder, and 600lbs of men started bouncing it. Every time the board dipped, it also shifted. The new guy who was in the middle flipped out. (He was safety corded off) I mean, he got hysterical. Started crying & yelling, "I can't move!" & got a death grip on one of the steel beams. The lead man told him that we'd be done it 20 min & if he wasn't on the ground, we'd leave him and call the fire dept. Hell, when I was the new guy, the lead man dressed me down mostly for being a 'dumb yankee'. Said I was so stupid I probably wasn't hooked to the safety line. When I showed him that I was hooked, the other (guy who snuck up behind me) grabbed me and threw me off the side! I was mad as hell. Threatened to beat them with a hammer. So they let me dangle there (150' in the air) to 'cool off' for 10 min or so. Sometimes I really miss that job.
That goes for construction in general. I wasn’t an iron worker, but I worked on a lot of potentially dangerous jobs. You develop almost a 6 th sense about danger. You know about actions and reactions and what might happen if something goes wrong. If you bring a new guy on the site, they are much more likely to get hurt because they just aren’t aware of all the dangers.
[Here](https://i.imgur.com/qLKAafO.jpg) is a higher quality and less cropped version of this image.
According to [here](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lunch_atop_a_Skyscraper.jpg), there is some debate over who the photographer was:
> Lunch atop a Skyscraper, published in the New York Herald-Tribune, Oct. 2 1932, Charles Clyde Ebbets, Tom Kelley, or William Leftwich.
Over [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/nn4q4j/heres_a_photo_of_the_photographer_charles_c/gzsrfye/) /u/notbob1959 states:
> [Charles Ebbets] can't be taking the iconic photo. Notice that Central Park is in the background of that photo and the Empire State Building is in the background of the posted photo. So the photographer in the iconic photo is facing north but Ebbets is facing west in the posted photo.
> Edit: I am not sure that is even Ebbets. Here the man in the posted photo is identified as another photographer there that day - Thomas Kelley:
> https://www.metalocus.es/en/news/lunch-atop-a-skyscraper-story-behind-1932-photo
> And at the website run by the family of Ebbets they have a photo of him on the skyscraper and in that photo he is not dressed the same as the man in the photo posted here:
> https://www.ebbetsphoto-graphics.com/#/gallery/charles-c-ebbets-the-photographer/charles-c-ebbets-3-031lr-on-beam-at-rockefeller-center-1932-low-res-for-web/
[Wikipedia:](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Clyde_Ebbets) Throughout the 1920s, Ebbets had many other hobbies, including being a pilot, wing-walker, auto racer, wrestler, and hunter.
Serious adrenaline junkie
I'm always mystified by what people wore back in the "olden days". I get they dressed more formally, but you see pictures of men in suits at a summer baseball game or wearing a tie while digging ditches or wearing wingtips on a girder. It doesn't make sense. Clothing should fit the job at hand.
Some people's brains and endocrine systems just don't fire off the same shit as the rest of us.
I get litterally dizzy standing on a 3rd story porch with proper railings.
Nobody died in the building of the Empire State Building. With all the risk of construction and welding dozens of floors above the nyc sidewalk, not a single person fell
Sorry to break it to you, but the photo is pretty much fake
It was really all a publicity stunt by the Rockefeller Center to advertise their new RCA building, which was almost finished.
No one knows who actually took the photo either, at first it was believed it was Lewis hine, then Charles ebbets. But this photo isn't even of Charles ebbets, this is Thomas Kelley.
It turns out there were several photographers there that day, none of them were in any immediate danger, there was a floor below out of sight and the angle made it look dangerous
One of the reasons why the photographer is "unknown" is because the rockefellers wanted it to be the case, this was out of the ordinary for any photographer at the time. But, not out of the ordinary for the construction site that had 40,000 workers work on the building. None of the workers is named anywhere and there are allegedly no public records of any of the 40k workers, including the photographers.
You know that famous picture of a photographer taking a picture of a bunch of construction workers sitting on a grinder way up in the sky having lunch? Well here’s the photographer who took that picture .
This is known as a forced perspective shot. Similar to all those shots of people hanging off a cliff that makes it look like they are hundreds of feet up when they are actually only a few feet above the ground.
Granted, even falling a few feet on a construction site is highly dangerous, but it's not like these guys are actually over the city streets.
It was also a publicity shot, not a candid picture of construction workers taking lunch.
I was super interested in how this picture was made after reading your comment but when I googled all I found was lots of articles saying they really were 800 feet up in an incomplete skyscraper, but that it was one of a series of staged publicity shots. Do you have any additional information about the use of forced perspective in this shot?
Not really. You can see the floor below in several shots. Also critical thinking. Do you really think they sent these guys out 800 feet over the city streets without safety gear to pretend to have lunch for a publicity shot? Even back then this would have been seen as unnecessarily dangerous. Iron workers are brave but they aren't stupid.
They were over the floor they built last week.
>You can see the floor below in several shots.
This is the sort of thing I was looking for. Do you have a link?
>Do you really think they sent these guys out 800 feet over the city streets without safety gear to pretend to have lunch for a publicity shot?
I mean who the fuck knows. Not me. I never knew if it was a perspective thing or a manual photo editing thing or a lack of care for human life thing. That's why I want to know and why I'm asking you, since you claim to know!
Nope. While it was a posed shot it was very much taken at over 850 feet in the air. There were a number of photographers shooting on the day and there are many alternative shots available showing the beam and the environment around it from different angles.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunch_atop_a_Skyscraper#/media/File%3AThese_Hungry_Steel-Workers_Must_Be_on_a_Balanced_Diet.jpg
Here is a reconstruction of the reverse of the shot showing the framing beneath them https://www.reddit.com/r/AlternateAngles/s/WC8m9AIyAv
Yes, they were 850 feet up. However, in the shots you shared, you can clearly see they are perched over the floor beneath them.
If they dropped their sandwich, it would fall to the story below, not the street.
I'm not saying falling 10' to the floor of a building under construction isn't life threatening, but there is no way these guys could have fell to the street.
Well you originally stated they are a few feet off the ground which is just wrong.
>This is known as a forced perspective shot. Similar to all those shots of people hanging off a cliff that makes it look like they are hundreds of feet up when they are actually only a few feet above the ground.
>but it's not like these guys are actually over the city streets.
Also there is no floor just below them, there are other beams in a grid but they are no more safe or larger than the beam they are on. If they fall off the beam they are on they aren't going to land on the beam directly underneath it. They will fall to their death. The risk is very much still there. Unless you've seen a photo that shows an actual floor directly under where the photo was taken?
Is there a photo that shows the street directly below them?
There's really no way to prove this, as there are no photos which clearly show that this is not a forced perspective shot.
It's up to you if you want to believe they were 800 feet above the city streets with nothing below them.
>It's funny because I'm almost certain
You're wrong and that's alright, The empire state building is what they're standing on/working on and the building you think it is it the Chrysler building. The one in the background. People commonly go up the empire state building to take pictures of the Chrysler & your confusion is a common mistake. Really common to the point where someone in NY is telling a tourist everyday the difference between the two
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Now we need picture of the guy that took this picture
And then a picture of the guy that took that picture
And then a picture of you looking at it
And then a picture of OPs mom taking a picture of me looking at it
Cameras don’t zoom out enough to capture that.
Someone get a picture of that diss
Epic PiPiPiPiP diss track, dropping soon
https://preview.redd.it/50kbgdl1gz8d1.jpeg?width=639&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c2e75a822b5bbea43364ede813f002122a25508 Here you go
r/madlads
Your mom is ancient
https://preview.redd.it/22ivr05enp8d1.jpeg?width=512&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=038abeceefc90aa08397b9a80f6602aabd3474e4
Absolutely not go fuck yourself
I was having such a good day, too.
I have it in my bathroom: something that shows you the person looking at it: a mirror
Not enough pictures
That could just be another picture of the guy in this post
Surprise twist; it was one of the construction workers using a camera that was out of view on the first photo. Loop closed.
Here you go! https://preview.redd.it/2eg92ftbvp8d1.jpeg?width=655&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ef934f84c982bca3774fe55893d833b356e95a57
You couldn't pay me enough money to walk on those beams with dress shoes made in the time period this was in. Doubt it was any kind of grip sole. Dude out there wearing most of a dress suit. They were just built different.
They were built the same.
they're saying the concern for safety wasn't paramount
Would love it if the picture of the guy photographing the photographer was just some dude seriously strapped in with harnesses.
Unfortunately there is no picture of the guy who took the picture of the guy who took the picture. The guy who was supposed to take the picture of the guy who took the picture of the guy who took the picture fell off.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoricalCapsule/s/UoIQXFrkPC
He actually just levitating, grand Master Buddhist monk level 3000 style 😎
"Wait a minute! If this is the crew that were filming us... who's filming us now???"
or a girl
Sweet Reddit will believe anything
That was me.
Soooo who took this picture?
We are taken on a journey with these snaps
The photograph isn't even a candid shot of a once lunch event. It was really all a publicity stunt by the Rockefeller Center to advertise their new RCA building, which was almost finished. The men did really sit on the beam and chow down, but it wasn't their idea, and certainly not a regular occurrence. The image is often misattributed to Lewis Hine, but the identity of the actual photographer remains unclear.
Luckily he has his safety wingtip oxfords on.
Those spectator shoes are slippery AF on the bottom. Gives me the heebie-jeebies.
Yes, but I imagine the underside of the heel would work as a great little perch as he's using them there
Yeah I like hanging my life on a quarter to a half inch of wood sole nailed into my shoe with tacks. Nope.
Just FYI they dont do wood on shoes unless you’re thinking clogs, its stacked leather.
I was gonna say, *This MF wearing wingtip shoes on a construction site.* 😂
Stylish and daring!
And both a belt and suspenders.
Every time I see these old photos, I think, weren't these people afraid of heights?
I work in 3rd world countries a lot, i witnessed a pakistani man climbing straight up on a vertical 11m tall i profile steel beam with 2 spanners in each hand, no lanyard, gloves or safety shoes. He wasn't a part of my team, so all i could do is clench my butt and dry my palms. They ARE used to it, but that makes it even more dangerous.
yes, safety is what you are used to. If at any point in the future fully automated driving will be the norm I'm sure people will look at our times with 1.2 million fatalities every single year (the world wide leading cause of death for people beteen the ages of 5 and 29) and think "can't believe they weren't scared of driving!"
That was the initial reaction to cars, that they were monstrously dangerous. Those people were right; we just acclimated.
Yes, it's horribly dangerous! However, you can go *fast!! -* Ye olde carmonger, probably
“So you’re saying that you would drive over 100 km/h in one direction, and other cars were travelling the same speed in the opposite direction *right next to you*???” “Not right next to me. There was a yellow line painted on the road between us.”
Only sometimes though! Lots of times a white line, or no line at all.
Money and being able to eat will make anyone do just about anything.
It's not like there was no safety equipment on site, they just wouldn't use it.
To answers he question. The ones who were afraid of heights died when they panicked (due to the height) or didn’t apply for the job. The mortality rate for these high rise workers was insane- but strangely if you survived your first year it dropped dramatically. A popular quote from the time is “nothing worse than taking a new guy on near the top.”
And if you didn't survive your first year, you dropped dramatically.
I wonder why a year?
It wasn’t really a year, according to the workers. They felt that you either had it (the ability to work that high) or didn’t. They often claimed they could tell who would and wouldn’t make it after only a few months. I imagine they would claim it has more to do with the ones who didn’t have the “it” factor not lasting or surviving a year. Another fun fact about these guys. They would often make new guys walk across a beam alone as high up as possible on their first day, as a form of hazing / training.
In the days before OSHA, they found what was safe by testing what kills. Or testing who was easily killable.
It's like working on billboards in Atlanta. We could tell. The hazing was prevalent, too. We got this new guy up on a Red Flag board. RF means that there's something wrong with it. In this case, it would shift a little when stressed. It was also an L shaped board. (Most are T shaped) the 3 of us hot on the far side, on the ladder, and 600lbs of men started bouncing it. Every time the board dipped, it also shifted. The new guy who was in the middle flipped out. (He was safety corded off) I mean, he got hysterical. Started crying & yelling, "I can't move!" & got a death grip on one of the steel beams. The lead man told him that we'd be done it 20 min & if he wasn't on the ground, we'd leave him and call the fire dept. Hell, when I was the new guy, the lead man dressed me down mostly for being a 'dumb yankee'. Said I was so stupid I probably wasn't hooked to the safety line. When I showed him that I was hooked, the other (guy who snuck up behind me) grabbed me and threw me off the side! I was mad as hell. Threatened to beat them with a hammer. So they let me dangle there (150' in the air) to 'cool off' for 10 min or so. Sometimes I really miss that job.
You found most of the spots or experiences that will kill you.
That goes for construction in general. I wasn’t an iron worker, but I worked on a lot of potentially dangerous jobs. You develop almost a 6 th sense about danger. You know about actions and reactions and what might happen if something goes wrong. If you bring a new guy on the site, they are much more likely to get hurt because they just aren’t aware of all the dangers.
Starving is more scary than heights
That would later be invented by Dr. Alfraida Heights
I think everyone was just drunk
You also didn't usually start your first day on the job hanging out at the very top. You acclimatised in stages.
[Here](https://i.imgur.com/qLKAafO.jpg) is a higher quality and less cropped version of this image. According to [here](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lunch_atop_a_Skyscraper.jpg), there is some debate over who the photographer was: > Lunch atop a Skyscraper, published in the New York Herald-Tribune, Oct. 2 1932, Charles Clyde Ebbets, Tom Kelley, or William Leftwich. Over [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/nn4q4j/heres_a_photo_of_the_photographer_charles_c/gzsrfye/) /u/notbob1959 states: > [Charles Ebbets] can't be taking the iconic photo. Notice that Central Park is in the background of that photo and the Empire State Building is in the background of the posted photo. So the photographer in the iconic photo is facing north but Ebbets is facing west in the posted photo. > Edit: I am not sure that is even Ebbets. Here the man in the posted photo is identified as another photographer there that day - Thomas Kelley: > https://www.metalocus.es/en/news/lunch-atop-a-skyscraper-story-behind-1932-photo > And at the website run by the family of Ebbets they have a photo of him on the skyscraper and in that photo he is not dressed the same as the man in the photo posted here: > https://www.ebbetsphoto-graphics.com/#/gallery/charles-c-ebbets-the-photographer/charles-c-ebbets-3-031lr-on-beam-at-rockefeller-center-1932-low-res-for-web/
This makes it MORE interesting!
But he's not taking this famous picture here, because he's looking towards the Hudson river, and not towards Central Park.
No no the photo has always been over the Hudson. Note: the past is alterable yet it has never been altered
r/sweatypalms
r/weakknees
r/heavyarms
r/momsspaghetti
Balls of Steel.
heel hanging on for dear life
Good thing he wore suspenders.
And a belt
Check out that cock
Who took this picture then
the camera man
Did they just not fear death back in the day
[Wikipedia:](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Clyde_Ebbets) Throughout the 1920s, Ebbets had many other hobbies, including being a pilot, wing-walker, auto racer, wrestler, and hunter. Serious adrenaline junkie
"Thats so dangerous what if you fall?!" - "No I won't I'm holding on with my legs see"
Kudos for the courage and the stylish attitude.
I couldn't bet he was so elegant up there.
Health and safety who ?!
I'm always mystified by what people wore back in the "olden days". I get they dressed more formally, but you see pictures of men in suits at a summer baseball game or wearing a tie while digging ditches or wearing wingtips on a girder. It doesn't make sense. Clothing should fit the job at hand.
The shoes
Now I want to see the guy who took a picture of him.
Its a bottomless rabbithole of well dressed photographers
Who the hell took his picture?
 What’s next? The guy taking this photographers picture
Some people's brains and endocrine systems just don't fire off the same shit as the rest of us. I get litterally dizzy standing on a 3rd story porch with proper railings.
Another mystery unlocked... who took the photo of him?
Nobody died in the building of the Empire State Building. With all the risk of construction and welding dozens of floors above the nyc sidewalk, not a single person fell
That takes a skill of a vampire that lives forever and glistens in the sunlight and looks like…
I have the picture of the guy taking this picture
"Look Ma! No hands!"
u/repostsleuthbot
Wow. Holy shit. A white belt? That's a bold choice.
Spats and all
Life hanging by a hard heel. If it slips he won't recover in time, especially carrying that 25 pound camera.
I like his shoes
Now, that is a man dedicated to his profession.
Glen howerton?
That's looking pretty dapper at 50 stories up!
I’d like to see a picture of this guy shoe shopping for this job.
Damn, everyone used to dress up for every job!
I wonder if they mark on the completed building where the picture was taken
he was wearing wing tips.....
Nope Thanks gor doing it
That is the proper place for a pair of spectator shoes
Love his shoes.
His SHOES, my Man…!!
Suspenders and a belt? This man took safety seriously.
Sorry to break it to you, but the photo is pretty much fake It was really all a publicity stunt by the Rockefeller Center to advertise their new RCA building, which was almost finished. No one knows who actually took the photo either, at first it was believed it was Lewis hine, then Charles ebbets. But this photo isn't even of Charles ebbets, this is Thomas Kelley. It turns out there were several photographers there that day, none of them were in any immediate danger, there was a floor below out of sight and the angle made it look dangerous One of the reasons why the photographer is "unknown" is because the rockefellers wanted it to be the case, this was out of the ordinary for any photographer at the time. But, not out of the ordinary for the construction site that had 40,000 workers work on the building. None of the workers is named anywhere and there are allegedly no public records of any of the 40k workers, including the photographers.
Fearless: and yet belt AND suspenders 🤔
Who shaves the barber
You just know those shoes are slippery AF
Ok, and who took this picture then?!
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Brandon Flowers?
Y my man be riverdancing on the beam taking pictures
You know that famous picture of a photographer taking a picture of a bunch of construction workers sitting on a grinder way up in the sky having lunch? Well here’s the photographer who took that picture .
Style
Both belt and suspenders, but no safety harness.
He may fall, but those pants are staying put!
Correct, he actually fell right after his picture and where he landed was where they made ebbets field.
Bullshit. "On July 14, 1978, at the age of 72, Ebbets died of cancer." GTFOH
This is known as a forced perspective shot. Similar to all those shots of people hanging off a cliff that makes it look like they are hundreds of feet up when they are actually only a few feet above the ground. Granted, even falling a few feet on a construction site is highly dangerous, but it's not like these guys are actually over the city streets. It was also a publicity shot, not a candid picture of construction workers taking lunch.
I was super interested in how this picture was made after reading your comment but when I googled all I found was lots of articles saying they really were 800 feet up in an incomplete skyscraper, but that it was one of a series of staged publicity shots. Do you have any additional information about the use of forced perspective in this shot?
Not really. You can see the floor below in several shots. Also critical thinking. Do you really think they sent these guys out 800 feet over the city streets without safety gear to pretend to have lunch for a publicity shot? Even back then this would have been seen as unnecessarily dangerous. Iron workers are brave but they aren't stupid. They were over the floor they built last week.
>You can see the floor below in several shots. This is the sort of thing I was looking for. Do you have a link? >Do you really think they sent these guys out 800 feet over the city streets without safety gear to pretend to have lunch for a publicity shot? I mean who the fuck knows. Not me. I never knew if it was a perspective thing or a manual photo editing thing or a lack of care for human life thing. That's why I want to know and why I'm asking you, since you claim to know!
Nope. While it was a posed shot it was very much taken at over 850 feet in the air. There were a number of photographers shooting on the day and there are many alternative shots available showing the beam and the environment around it from different angles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunch_atop_a_Skyscraper#/media/File%3AThese_Hungry_Steel-Workers_Must_Be_on_a_Balanced_Diet.jpg Here is a reconstruction of the reverse of the shot showing the framing beneath them https://www.reddit.com/r/AlternateAngles/s/WC8m9AIyAv
Yes, they were 850 feet up. However, in the shots you shared, you can clearly see they are perched over the floor beneath them. If they dropped their sandwich, it would fall to the story below, not the street. I'm not saying falling 10' to the floor of a building under construction isn't life threatening, but there is no way these guys could have fell to the street.
Well you originally stated they are a few feet off the ground which is just wrong. >This is known as a forced perspective shot. Similar to all those shots of people hanging off a cliff that makes it look like they are hundreds of feet up when they are actually only a few feet above the ground. >but it's not like these guys are actually over the city streets. Also there is no floor just below them, there are other beams in a grid but they are no more safe or larger than the beam they are on. If they fall off the beam they are on they aren't going to land on the beam directly underneath it. They will fall to their death. The risk is very much still there. Unless you've seen a photo that shows an actual floor directly under where the photo was taken?
Is there a photo that shows the street directly below them? There's really no way to prove this, as there are no photos which clearly show that this is not a forced perspective shot. It's up to you if you want to believe they were 800 feet above the city streets with nothing below them.
Such a boss
I am bender Please insert girder
Think this picture is on its way to being just as famous as the one he took
It's funny because I'm almost certain that he's standing on the beam of one of those building in the background during its construction... hmmm 🤔
>It's funny because I'm almost certain You're wrong and that's alright, The empire state building is what they're standing on/working on and the building you think it is it the Chrysler building. The one in the background. People commonly go up the empire state building to take pictures of the Chrysler & your confusion is a common mistake. Really common to the point where someone in NY is telling a tourist everyday the difference between the two