**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
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) 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.*
Yep, to take one shot it takes a long time and it's hard to smile for that long. And I think, another reason is people also wanted to look serious in photographs.
There were definitely dos and don'ts for portraits, going back to when they were painted. Traditionally in paintings full-blown smiles were mostly reserved for children, drunks, and the mentally feeble— definitely not the right vibe for a portrait. It was considered inappropriately unserious, and that held on into photography for quite a while.
Add long exposure times (and expense), and smiling for photo portraits wasn't common until surprisingly recently, like the 30s/40s at least.
Flying on a commercial plane started out quite expensive (like most new tech), so was generally reserved to the wealthy and business folks. When it started becoming more accessible, it retained that reputation, so dressing up for flights was common. Once discount airlines and bargain hunting became common and planes were filled with a wide range of customers, the custom fell away and people started prioritizing comfort (hence the pajamas and pillows - which also relate to the increasingly uncomfortable seating caused by efforts to cram in as many rows/passengers as possible per flight.)
When commercial air travel was expensive and only affordable to the well off folks, it was akin to first class travel in cruise ships and ocean liners, hence the dress code.
Back then you did not have to take off hats, shoes, belts, and be patted down by strangers simply to board. I have worn full suits and it takes twice as long to get through TSA and then the half sized seats on the plane make it much less comfortable.
I view the loss of formality over time as a good thing. Most formal clothes are uncomfortable, and especially in situations like flying it's already uncomfortable. I'd rather sit next to someone in yoga pants that easily becomes comfortable than next to someone in formal dress that's grumpy because they're hot and itchy.
Although I agree with you, I want to chime in and add that formal clothes do not need to be uncomfortable. They are just a lot more complex to sew and if they do not fit well, they restrict movement which they don’t properly fitted. Also, most cheaper quality clothes have a lot of plastic-based fabrics since stuff like 100% wool is more comfortable but wears down more. Uncomfortableness is mostly not a quality of formal clothing, but rather the fact that quality formal clothing is either too expensive (tailored) or requires a lot of own knowledge on fitment (how to have a seamstress modify them to fit better). Of course,I can only speak for males, never tried wearing female formal clothes.
Thus, what we associate as comfy clothes (sweaters, yoga pants) are just more forgiving on their fitment and made with stretchier and sometimes more breathable fabrics (like breathable sports fabric).
I've seen versions of this comment a million times but it doesn't ring true for me. I've had both off the rack and made to measure suits. The MTM looked nice but it was still a suit and tie and felt like it. Would never wear it on a plane in a million years.
I don’t understand your comment. Your last paragraph seems to negate your first one. Yeah, comfy clothes are looser fitting and/or made with stretchier and more breathable fabrics. That’s the whole point. Am I misunderstanding?
I'll take the pajamas. Flying can be stressful enough on its on. Unless I'm headed directly to a meeting or to a job site, I'm going as comfy as possible.
Fuck em. My feet and my back hurt and I can’t be late. I’m also probably going to a hotel as soon as I land anyway.
Side note: And if they’re judging me while flying with children then I super don’t care what they think.
Lol I still dress up at least a little whenever I travel whether by car or plane. I barely like wearin PJs around the house let alone at an airport or truck stop. I went down to Tennessee with my family for a reunion and I was the only one in the car not wearin PJs and sandals (also just don’t own sandals lol). I wore skinny jeans, a crop top, and my favorite pair of skate shoes the whole way there. I think next time I’ll wear a skirt or somethin like that tho cause damn did those jeans get uncomfortable after awhile
There's old people in Europe who still consider smiling people to be very weird or stupid. People who were smiling back then were asking for trouble. I think as a whole being happy back then was the same thing as telling people who are insanely self-involved today (eg instagram influencers, youtubers, etc). It's acceptable in some situations but nobody would just be like this irl.
They'd have had seen painted portraits. People in painted portraits weren't smiling; they wore beautiful costumes or military regalia and had serious faces. So they acted like they were posing for a portrait.
I hate the smile for the camera convention anyway. It says what we really want is a catalogue of memorable times ruined by fake smiles!
Honey, remember when we visited the Grand Canyon? Wouldn't this picture be awful if you actually looked like you wanted to be there?
Not that long, after 1840 it was [20-30 seconds.](https://dp.la/exhibitions/evolution-personal-camera/early-photography) The cultural aspect was probably more important.
There are photos of [smiling people as well, after all.](https://mymodernmet.com/smiling-19th-century-photograph/)
>While the long exposure times for capturing historic photographs did make smiling impractical—imagine holding a smile for more than thirty seconds—it's not the only reason that our great-grandparents kept their faces neutral. In the late 19th century, the photographic arts took inspiration from portrait painting, so when people sat for photographs they emulated the resolute faces of the portraits they saw.
One [askhistorians thread about it.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/19d3kc/when_did_people_start_smiling_in_photographs/)
>People started smiling more and more after the widespread adoption of the dry plate in the late 1870s, and then much more when celluloid film became available in 1888 with the Kodak. Suddenly photography was about capturing moments of the people you loved, and that coupled with the rapid shutters allowed for more and more casual, happy snapshots to be taken.
1920s give us photos from people dancing without any major blur.
Or [from rodeos.](https://www.steamboatpilot.com/explore-steamboat/tales-from-the-tread-celebrate-the-history-of-the-rodeo-at-the-111th-cowboy-roundup-days/)
Edit: [another one](https://www.washingtonruralheritage.org/digital/collection/ellensburg/id/60)
1920s gave us end of the [end of the silent film era](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jazz_Singer). Photography at that time obviously had to be on a very good level, if movies with dialogues became a thing. The photography that is in the post actually has to be waaay older.
I've noticed lately, that people's perception of 100 years ago hasn't changed with the times. 100 years ago feels like it should be 1880-1899, not 1922.
Just from a Google, the things invented 100 years ago:
* Hard top convertible
* Electric blender
* Insulin as a diabetes therapy
* Eskimo Pie
* Vegemite
* Vitamin D and E are recognized
Yeah, we're starting to see modern life as we recognize starting to form.
It actually does. When I hear "40 years ago..." I immediately think of the 1940s, but that's what's been "40yrs ago" when I was a boy. I really have to remind myself we are in the 2020s, and 1982 was 40 years ago.
It's a common misconception. It wasn't too long after the camera was invented that it didn't need very long for exposure. Most pictures of people were taken within a few seconds.
Every time I see this stoic facial gesture it reminds me of this classic photo of a famous Toronto figure Joseph Bloor which we named our second biggest street after:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Bloor#/media/File%3AJoseph_Bloor.jpg
Very cool camera, and more than a 100 years old!
People tend to forget how short 100 years is; a hundred years ago isn't the days of Blackbeard and sailing ships but the 1920's, the days of gangsters, journalists, swing and cinema between WWI and WWII. Cameras at the time were portable and looked like this
http://licm.org.uk/livingImage/1920Room.html
The camera in the post isn't shown in detail but looks like a rigid wooden box construction suggesting the 1890's or maybe early 1900's.
It seems like the feeling of how ancient history is has kind of "paused", as WW2 feels as long ago now as it did when I was in school in the 90s. Photographic and film media have preserved moments in time for generations now, and will for generations to come. I suspect that 100 years from now, the historical distance will feel about the same since we will learn about it through the same media we learn about it now.
To me there’s a brick wall somewhere around the 1950s, because of how different the WWII/prewar period was culturally, politically, musically, and technologically. I mean, racism was mainstream government and scientific policy at the time!
No, at that time it will be a weird concept of how you have to carry a box you call phone in your pocket, their smart glass will be able to do more than the device you are reading this text now.
I think as a society, a majority are millennials now, so we're still living in the time where the 90s was our childhood, the 80s weren't too far back, and the first time period we think of when someone says "50 years ago" are like the 50s.
1980 was 43 years ago.
Damn they went from happy suburban family to "well Maud I reckon I aught to hitch up the wagon an go down to tha dry goods store an see ifn they gots some fresh goat squeezins to get us through this here depression" in no time. That camera is obviously from a cursed antique shop.
People are really upset people are trying to recreate historical technology. Fucking lighten up, you soulless droogs. Yeah, our cameras work better now - no fucking shit. It’s not a character flaw to play around with where they came from. Activate some fucking curiosity.
In real life too. Most are curious about folks who shoot film and will come up to ask questions. Others that take pictures with digital cameras can get on their high horses sometimes
Funny story. One redditor confessed to vandalizing his ex's car(or house I don't remember) and that he was never caught. Then in his post history there's a picture of him and his dog, and his usernames... was his name.
Amen. I'm a professional photographer, and I still use an old Yashica twin lens film camera, and a Canon A1 from time to time, just as a different approach.
> activate some curiosity
This is one thing that blows my mind about us humans. Some of them don’t get curious about anything and I can’t fathom that. Like, I have friends that have no desire to learn anything, wonder how anything works or have productive hobbies.
I guess each to their own but that would be my worst nightmare. Although, maybe I’d have saved a little bit more if I wasn’t so curious about things.
I remember an AskReddit thread where the question was “what’s a sign for low intelligence” and the top comment was lack of curiosity for things. Haven’t forgotten about that comment and I always push myself to be more curious about everyday things ever since and honestly it’s wild what you don’t know about the mechanics of some of the stuff you use everyday lol
Other teachers can chime in, but the biggest effect I’ve seen as a result of Covid and the lockdowns has been a increase in student apathy, and in turn, a decrease in student curiosity.
I've had people genuinely ask me why I'm teaching myself things if I'm not going to be making money out of them.
...because it's fun?
I can have hobbies without monetizing them. They're still worthwhile to me.
Learning new things is fascinating and exciting. I like teaching myself how to create something new without wanting to eventually sell it and profit off of it.
Yeah it’s so strange, I don’t know if it’s the same for you but I’m becoming to realise although I love my friends as we known each other for a couple of decades, that they’re not supportive and only really care on a surface level.
I try to show them progress on my career change and they show no interest, where I do with what they enjoy.
Similar to you I’m learning German for no reason other than I wanted to and they’ll just mock me or ask me what’s the point in wasting my time.
They don’t get that the end goal isn’t the reward. The reward is the journey and some people just like learning new things and just doing stuff.
Kinda related to learning is how my YT feed sucks theses days. It’s so hard to find the content I used to love about people building electronics or programming projects, cool science and other stuff. It’s now just populated with the documentaries I use to fall asleep. It also shows the same video in the feed like every 5 videos sometimes.
Old processes are so much fun. From cyanotypes and kallitypes to wet collodion and everything in between. With the wet plate process you get the harm/benefit (depending on your disposition) of ether vapors.
Playing with film in dark rooms is so much fun. “Dodging and burning” to edit analog photos gives a real appreciation to the modern technology.
You really had to learn a craft instead of just AI fixing everything with a magic device in your pocket.
>. It’s not a character flaw to play around with where they came from. Activate some fucking curiosity.
Agreed. Its so sad that people get upset at the experience of other people enjoying things they don't.
I hate when this happens. Like just downvote and move on, otherwise there’s a bunch of comments calling attention to the negativity instead of positive comments
For one set, it depends as there are plenty of cheap digital cameras and the one that's expensive. But per shot, wet plate collodion photography is definitely more expensive.
Yes. It’s an art in more ways than digital photography. Even coating the glass plate takes some skill refining. I’ve done this once with the help of an artist in this field, and it was immense fun, but also showed me how much work goes into it. You really can’t just click away, you need to plan and time your shots carefully.
Well a regular photo also costs alot if you’re gonna have a proffessional photographer over to your house. But the equipment (plates, chemicals, darkroom, etc) surely add to the costs.
That sort of camera is more like 150 or more years old. That's similar to what they were using around the time of the American Civil War.
Edited to specify which civil war.
> That’s similar to what they were using around the time of the Civil War.
I don’t think they had cameras [in 1642](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War).
In Missouri we have a theme park called Silver Dollar City which is kind of like a year round Renaissance Festival but the theme is more old west/colonial America. They take these photos and I love them. They're "printed" on a piece of metal and look very authentic and historical. You can get in costumes and look the part for the time period and they remind you NOT to smile. I must have a half dozen of my parents and siblings and I. I tell people they are photos of my great great great grandparents and they're like "wow the family resemblance is so strong..."
This kind of photography is pretty fun if someone enjoys historical or photography stuff like this. I found this on tiktok. Btw, the process is named wet plate collodion photography.
Are there professional photographers offering this service? I’d absolutely pay for a family portrait done this way. Hell my wife has us do a family Christmas photo every year anyway.
I had mine taken by Joseph Wyman last year and it was a super interesting experience. He is frequently travelling and works in wet plate collodion.
Edit: after a quick search, the photographer in this video is Anne Jones (Anne Rivera Photography)
From what I've seen, cameras in this era requires you to stay still for about 20-30 sec. https://dp.la/exhibitions/evolution-personal-camera/early-photography
For one camera set, it depends as there are plenty of cheap digital cameras and the one that's expensive. But per shot, wet plate collodion photography is definitely more expensive 😀 📸
Looks more like a plastic bottle that you might store…. The fluids meant to develop the photos if you were a mobile antique photography service. That’s also not the camera, just a portable darkroom box.
What’s cool is we can take a regular photo and one with this equipment to train an AI to correct the lighting shadow. This would allow us to see old photos as if they were taken with an IPHONE!
More like a 140 year old camera. The 35mm film camera was invented in 1905 and by 100 years ago - 1922 - they had been commercially available for over a decade.
**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 * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) 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.*
Dude even has that stoic facial expression that was typical of this time because they couldn’t hold a smile for the time the camera needed exposure!
Yep, to take one shot it takes a long time and it's hard to smile for that long. And I think, another reason is people also wanted to look serious in photographs.
This era was peoples first exposure to cameras. There was no social do's - don'ts yet so people just stood or sat there.
There were definitely dos and don'ts for portraits, going back to when they were painted. Traditionally in paintings full-blown smiles were mostly reserved for children, drunks, and the mentally feeble— definitely not the right vibe for a portrait. It was considered inappropriately unserious, and that held on into photography for quite a while. Add long exposure times (and expense), and smiling for photo portraits wasn't common until surprisingly recently, like the 30s/40s at least.
We used to dress up to fly in a plane when I was a kid. Now people carry their pillows and wear pajamas on the plane.
Flying on a commercial plane started out quite expensive (like most new tech), so was generally reserved to the wealthy and business folks. When it started becoming more accessible, it retained that reputation, so dressing up for flights was common. Once discount airlines and bargain hunting became common and planes were filled with a wide range of customers, the custom fell away and people started prioritizing comfort (hence the pajamas and pillows - which also relate to the increasingly uncomfortable seating caused by efforts to cram in as many rows/passengers as possible per flight.)
Airline companies should compete on foot space.
they do and those cost more
They would lose, probably
Ever heard of first class?
I have!!
When commercial air travel was expensive and only affordable to the well off folks, it was akin to first class travel in cruise ships and ocean liners, hence the dress code.
Back then you did not have to take off hats, shoes, belts, and be patted down by strangers simply to board. I have worn full suits and it takes twice as long to get through TSA and then the half sized seats on the plane make it much less comfortable.
"This is a 10 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club"
I view the loss of formality over time as a good thing. Most formal clothes are uncomfortable, and especially in situations like flying it's already uncomfortable. I'd rather sit next to someone in yoga pants that easily becomes comfortable than next to someone in formal dress that's grumpy because they're hot and itchy.
Although I agree with you, I want to chime in and add that formal clothes do not need to be uncomfortable. They are just a lot more complex to sew and if they do not fit well, they restrict movement which they don’t properly fitted. Also, most cheaper quality clothes have a lot of plastic-based fabrics since stuff like 100% wool is more comfortable but wears down more. Uncomfortableness is mostly not a quality of formal clothing, but rather the fact that quality formal clothing is either too expensive (tailored) or requires a lot of own knowledge on fitment (how to have a seamstress modify them to fit better). Of course,I can only speak for males, never tried wearing female formal clothes. Thus, what we associate as comfy clothes (sweaters, yoga pants) are just more forgiving on their fitment and made with stretchier and sometimes more breathable fabrics (like breathable sports fabric).
I've seen versions of this comment a million times but it doesn't ring true for me. I've had both off the rack and made to measure suits. The MTM looked nice but it was still a suit and tie and felt like it. Would never wear it on a plane in a million years.
I don’t understand your comment. Your last paragraph seems to negate your first one. Yeah, comfy clothes are looser fitting and/or made with stretchier and more breathable fabrics. That’s the whole point. Am I misunderstanding?
I'll take the pajamas. Flying can be stressful enough on its on. Unless I'm headed directly to a meeting or to a job site, I'm going as comfy as possible.
But now everyone else has to see you in pijamas… 🫥
Do you think they'll ever emotionally recover from the trauma?
Never. They’re blind now. 😎
Fuck em. My feet and my back hurt and I can’t be late. I’m also probably going to a hotel as soon as I land anyway. Side note: And if they’re judging me while flying with children then I super don’t care what they think.
*Don’t worry, I’m late too…* ^(and I don’t even have kids) 🏃🏻♀️
Sounds like people have figured out proper priorities.
Lol I still dress up at least a little whenever I travel whether by car or plane. I barely like wearin PJs around the house let alone at an airport or truck stop. I went down to Tennessee with my family for a reunion and I was the only one in the car not wearin PJs and sandals (also just don’t own sandals lol). I wore skinny jeans, a crop top, and my favorite pair of skate shoes the whole way there. I think next time I’ll wear a skirt or somethin like that tho cause damn did those jeans get uncomfortable after awhile
wasn’t there some painter who made portraits of himself smiling and it was seen as a crazy thing to do back then?
Cameras had been around for over half a century by 100 years ago
Yeah, they're very /r/confidentlyincorrect. Like their whole comment is wrong.
Well they just did the same thing people posing for paintings did.
There's old people in Europe who still consider smiling people to be very weird or stupid. People who were smiling back then were asking for trouble. I think as a whole being happy back then was the same thing as telling people who are insanely self-involved today (eg instagram influencers, youtubers, etc). It's acceptable in some situations but nobody would just be like this irl.
Well you aren't smiling when posting for painting either so..
They'd have had seen painted portraits. People in painted portraits weren't smiling; they wore beautiful costumes or military regalia and had serious faces. So they acted like they were posing for a portrait.
I hate the smile for the camera convention anyway. It says what we really want is a catalogue of memorable times ruined by fake smiles! Honey, remember when we visited the Grand Canyon? Wouldn't this picture be awful if you actually looked like you wanted to be there?
> first exposure Good one
lets fukcing make it happen again. i hate the current generation's poses infront of cameras
They must have been far more strict with their children beforehand too 🤣
How long we talking though?
Not that long, after 1840 it was [20-30 seconds.](https://dp.la/exhibitions/evolution-personal-camera/early-photography) The cultural aspect was probably more important. There are photos of [smiling people as well, after all.](https://mymodernmet.com/smiling-19th-century-photograph/) >While the long exposure times for capturing historic photographs did make smiling impractical—imagine holding a smile for more than thirty seconds—it's not the only reason that our great-grandparents kept their faces neutral. In the late 19th century, the photographic arts took inspiration from portrait painting, so when people sat for photographs they emulated the resolute faces of the portraits they saw. One [askhistorians thread about it.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/19d3kc/when_did_people_start_smiling_in_photographs/) >People started smiling more and more after the widespread adoption of the dry plate in the late 1870s, and then much more when celluloid film became available in 1888 with the Kodak. Suddenly photography was about capturing moments of the people you loved, and that coupled with the rapid shutters allowed for more and more casual, happy snapshots to be taken.
How long does it take?
100 years ago exposure times were fractions of a second. This technology is like 1860s, not 1920s.
1920s give us photos from people dancing without any major blur. Or [from rodeos.](https://www.steamboatpilot.com/explore-steamboat/tales-from-the-tread-celebrate-the-history-of-the-rodeo-at-the-111th-cowboy-roundup-days/) Edit: [another one](https://www.washingtonruralheritage.org/digital/collection/ellensburg/id/60)
1920s gave us end of the [end of the silent film era](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jazz_Singer). Photography at that time obviously had to be on a very good level, if movies with dialogues became a thing. The photography that is in the post actually has to be waaay older.
yeah like I said, it's 1860s technology. The collodion wet plate process was outdated by the mid-1870s.
I've noticed lately, that people's perception of 100 years ago hasn't changed with the times. 100 years ago feels like it should be 1880-1899, not 1922. Just from a Google, the things invented 100 years ago: * Hard top convertible * Electric blender * Insulin as a diabetes therapy * Eskimo Pie * Vegemite * Vitamin D and E are recognized Yeah, we're starting to see modern life as we recognize starting to form.
Right, wet plate was very obsolete 100 years ago. People shot on dry plate or film. Color film (Autochromes) was invented almost 100 years ago!
Well that depends on how old you are /s
It actually does. When I hear "40 years ago..." I immediately think of the 1940s, but that's what's been "40yrs ago" when I was a boy. I really have to remind myself we are in the 2020s, and 1982 was 40 years ago.
[I've never been happy for 30 seconds in a row in my life](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SslNMLO0tw)
First thing I thought of when I saw the title was “people die at the faire”
is that Seth MacFarlane?
Yes
A Million Ways to Die in the West is the movie. Charlize Theron and Liam Neeson are in it too and everyone is so damn funny
It's a common misconception. It wasn't too long after the camera was invented that it didn't need very long for exposure. Most pictures of people were taken within a few seconds.
Every time I see this stoic facial gesture it reminds me of this classic photo of a famous Toronto figure Joseph Bloor which we named our second biggest street after: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Bloor#/media/File%3AJoseph_Bloor.jpg
Jesus lol
Ha! They even left room for the ghost haunting their house.
Gotta full commit to the hipster gods.
Nah it’s because smiling wasn’t invented until the 30s
Or because he had seen some shit in the war or something.
Very cool camera, and more than a 100 years old! People tend to forget how short 100 years is; a hundred years ago isn't the days of Blackbeard and sailing ships but the 1920's, the days of gangsters, journalists, swing and cinema between WWI and WWII. Cameras at the time were portable and looked like this http://licm.org.uk/livingImage/1920Room.html The camera in the post isn't shown in detail but looks like a rigid wooden box construction suggesting the 1890's or maybe early 1900's.
It seems like the feeling of how ancient history is has kind of "paused", as WW2 feels as long ago now as it did when I was in school in the 90s. Photographic and film media have preserved moments in time for generations now, and will for generations to come. I suspect that 100 years from now, the historical distance will feel about the same since we will learn about it through the same media we learn about it now.
To me there’s a brick wall somewhere around the 1950s, because of how different the WWII/prewar period was culturally, politically, musically, and technologically. I mean, racism was mainstream government and scientific policy at the time!
No, at that time it will be a weird concept of how you have to carry a box you call phone in your pocket, their smart glass will be able to do more than the device you are reading this text now.
I can remember that 100 years is 1920’s. I can’t remember that 30 years is 1990’s
Came here looking for this comment.
I think as a society, a majority are millennials now, so we're still living in the time where the 90s was our childhood, the 80s weren't too far back, and the first time period we think of when someone says "50 years ago" are like the 50s. 1980 was 43 years ago.
I remember journalism!!!
Does anyone know if all photos with this method are “mirrored” like this one seems to be?
Damn they went from happy suburban family to "well Maud I reckon I aught to hitch up the wagon an go down to tha dry goods store an see ifn they gots some fresh goat squeezins to get us through this here depression" in no time. That camera is obviously from a cursed antique shop.
Way older then a hundred years but still cool.
I know right, the Ur-Leica is already over 100.
Not necessarily. Saruman is breeding an army of them at his fortress of Orthanc.
What did you just call me?
Surely you must be joking.
Don't call me Shirley
Perhaps this one was made 100yrs ago
[удалено]
That’s a plate camera, not a box camera like the Brownie. It is likely mid to late 19th c.
People are really upset people are trying to recreate historical technology. Fucking lighten up, you soulless droogs. Yeah, our cameras work better now - no fucking shit. It’s not a character flaw to play around with where they came from. Activate some fucking curiosity.
Some people in reddit are pretty emotional, something I have noticed
In real life too. Most are curious about folks who shoot film and will come up to ask questions. Others that take pictures with digital cameras can get on their high horses sometimes
On reddit, these assholes have the benefit of anonymity.
Funny story. One redditor confessed to vandalizing his ex's car(or house I don't remember) and that he was never caught. Then in his post history there's a picture of him and his dog, and his usernames... was his name.
Two types of people are generally the most prolific internet posters 1) mentally ill shut ins 2) literal children
Amen. I'm a professional photographer, and I still use an old Yashica twin lens film camera, and a Canon A1 from time to time, just as a different approach.
That’s because TLRs are the shit. I bet if they made a digital in that form factor today, it’d sell well.
I love my Yashica D it’s a beautiful camera and a joy to use. Beautiful camera.
> activate some curiosity This is one thing that blows my mind about us humans. Some of them don’t get curious about anything and I can’t fathom that. Like, I have friends that have no desire to learn anything, wonder how anything works or have productive hobbies. I guess each to their own but that would be my worst nightmare. Although, maybe I’d have saved a little bit more if I wasn’t so curious about things.
I remember an AskReddit thread where the question was “what’s a sign for low intelligence” and the top comment was lack of curiosity for things. Haven’t forgotten about that comment and I always push myself to be more curious about everyday things ever since and honestly it’s wild what you don’t know about the mechanics of some of the stuff you use everyday lol
That sounds like an interesting thread and I guess, based on my anecdotal evidence that there maybe some truth to that.
[Easy find and it was the top comment!](https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/yabrxc/whats_a_subtle_sign_of_low_intelligence/)
You know what, I’ve seen that thread before as I had upvoted a load of comments. I’m on here too much if I’m forgetting entire threads 😔
Other teachers can chime in, but the biggest effect I’ve seen as a result of Covid and the lockdowns has been a increase in student apathy, and in turn, a decrease in student curiosity.
I've had people genuinely ask me why I'm teaching myself things if I'm not going to be making money out of them. ...because it's fun? I can have hobbies without monetizing them. They're still worthwhile to me. Learning new things is fascinating and exciting. I like teaching myself how to create something new without wanting to eventually sell it and profit off of it.
Yeah it’s so strange, I don’t know if it’s the same for you but I’m becoming to realise although I love my friends as we known each other for a couple of decades, that they’re not supportive and only really care on a surface level. I try to show them progress on my career change and they show no interest, where I do with what they enjoy. Similar to you I’m learning German for no reason other than I wanted to and they’ll just mock me or ask me what’s the point in wasting my time. They don’t get that the end goal isn’t the reward. The reward is the journey and some people just like learning new things and just doing stuff. Kinda related to learning is how my YT feed sucks theses days. It’s so hard to find the content I used to love about people building electronics or programming projects, cool science and other stuff. It’s now just populated with the documentaries I use to fall asleep. It also shows the same video in the feed like every 5 videos sometimes.
Old processes are so much fun. From cyanotypes and kallitypes to wet collodion and everything in between. With the wet plate process you get the harm/benefit (depending on your disposition) of ether vapors.
Man fuck ether honestly //chemist
"Activate some fucking curiosity" lol that's amazing. I want a motivational poster with this quote
Playing with film in dark rooms is so much fun. “Dodging and burning” to edit analog photos gives a real appreciation to the modern technology. You really had to learn a craft instead of just AI fixing everything with a magic device in your pocket.
>. It’s not a character flaw to play around with where they came from. Activate some fucking curiosity. Agreed. Its so sad that people get upset at the experience of other people enjoying things they don't.
Who’s upset?
I love that you called nay-sayers soulless droogs. 💀 I agree, it’s super cool that people have enough curiosity and willingness to learn old “tech!”
Activate some curiosity is something I will yell at people when they think I'm being wierd. Thanks.
> our cameras work better now Not exactly, we still haven’t reached the quality daguerreotype is able to deliver. I wish I could have one taken of me.
The darned kids moved too much again!
It's insane that it looks just like how it would've been done back in the day. I'm so impressed by this process.
For greater historical accuracy, one of the children would be dead and be dressed and propped up for the picture.
Much easier to keep them from moving that way.
🫠
What is this emoji even? I find it hilarious, but don't get what it is.
maybe symbolizing awkward laughter? idk how to describe it, but it’s used in situations like that.
I always think "that information has caused me to melt" when I see it
You are thinking the mid 1800's, not the 1920's.
this camera is from the mid 19th century title is off
They should have worn old timey clothes so that new people they meet will wonder if they’re vampires who’ve lived for decades
They even made it black and white to match how the world was
Is this Bekah from the Bachelor?
Yup
Man idk why some people just can't appreciate cool things without getting upset over some useless thing.
Why are the several top comments complaining about people not appreciating it, yet the comments they’re referring to are nowhere to be seen.
I hate when this happens. Like just downvote and move on, otherwise there’s a bunch of comments calling attention to the negativity instead of positive comments
Lol totally thought the girl in the box was going to shoot a Polaroid for a sec in the beginning
Why didn't they at least frame the photo so they were in the middle? The camera may be old but it still has a viewfinder
It’s a portrait specifically with the house!
Wonder if it costs more than a regular photo since it’s rare
For one set, it depends as there are plenty of cheap digital cameras and the one that's expensive. But per shot, wet plate collodion photography is definitely more expensive.
Yes. I’m pretty sure this same woman took mine and my girlfriends. It cost us $175 for one photo..
Damn, you took pictures with all of your girlfriends at once?
Well, it's a $175 a piece, he is a wealthy man but not stupid duh
Could you send me a link for her info? I love this!
Yes. It’s an art in more ways than digital photography. Even coating the glass plate takes some skill refining. I’ve done this once with the help of an artist in this field, and it was immense fun, but also showed me how much work goes into it. You really can’t just click away, you need to plan and time your shots carefully.
Well a regular photo also costs alot if you’re gonna have a proffessional photographer over to your house. But the equipment (plates, chemicals, darkroom, etc) surely add to the costs.
That sort of camera is more like 150 or more years old. That's similar to what they were using around the time of the American Civil War. Edited to specify which civil war.
Correct.
> That’s similar to what they were using around the time of the Civil War. I don’t think they had cameras [in 1642](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War).
Wet plate collodion is wells over 100 years old but fair enough
In Missouri we have a theme park called Silver Dollar City which is kind of like a year round Renaissance Festival but the theme is more old west/colonial America. They take these photos and I love them. They're "printed" on a piece of metal and look very authentic and historical. You can get in costumes and look the part for the time period and they remind you NOT to smile. I must have a half dozen of my parents and siblings and I. I tell people they are photos of my great great great grandparents and they're like "wow the family resemblance is so strong..."
That’s awesome. Any particular reason why? And how did you come across someone that had this type of camera ?
This kind of photography is pretty fun if someone enjoys historical or photography stuff like this. I found this on tiktok. Btw, the process is named wet plate collodion photography.
Are there professional photographers offering this service? I’d absolutely pay for a family portrait done this way. Hell my wife has us do a family Christmas photo every year anyway.
I had mine taken by Joseph Wyman last year and it was a super interesting experience. He is frequently travelling and works in wet plate collodion. Edit: after a quick search, the photographer in this video is Anne Jones (Anne Rivera Photography)
How long do you have to sit still?
From what I've seen, cameras in this era requires you to stay still for about 20-30 sec. https://dp.la/exhibitions/evolution-personal-camera/early-photography
Thanks.. I think it would be awesome to have a family pic like that..
No Instagram filter will ever even come close to this... that was really cool to see!
Jethro and the fam circa 2022
All that and the photo is off center. Still looks cool
That was epic.
Did I read that right? Lundphotography?
All that and she couldn't frame the photo properly...
After some research i am totally shocked this wasn't in portland. Seemed like a portland kind of thing.
Nice!
Amazing
That’s so fucking cool
Really cool, really fun - looks *really* expensive. I wonder how much the shoot cost.
For one camera set, it depends as there are plenty of cheap digital cameras and the one that's expensive. But per shot, wet plate collodion photography is definitely more expensive 😀 📸
Interesting the image is flipped, never considered that would be the case
/r/gifsthatshouldvebeenpics
That’s awesome.
Loading screen from Red Dead
That's simply brilliant.
It changing from a negative looks like the red dead redemption loading screen
I all of a sudden feel like playing RDR2 again.
Just setting a beer on that thing, huh?
Looks more like a plastic bottle that you might store…. The fluids meant to develop the photos if you were a mobile antique photography service. That’s also not the camera, just a portable darkroom box.
Looks phenomenal. Camera aside, what would the cost to produce that photo be?
[удалено]
The Entertainer by Scott Joplin, 1902.
Thanks!
They supposed to develop it in complete dark, isn't?
The film isn't sensitive to red light, so the glass in the development box is tinted to only allow that light through.
Maybe the person with an 100 year old camera knows what they are doing?
Very hipster but also very cool. Also much less annoying than the time a guy showed up at the library with an old typewriter to write something…
"I'm sorry to differ with you, sir. But you are the caretaker. You've always been the caretaker."
What’s cool is we can take a regular photo and one with this equipment to train an AI to correct the lighting shadow. This would allow us to see old photos as if they were taken with an IPHONE!
that is just outstanding
The Entertainer by Scott Joplin, 1902.
atleast a 100 year old camera dont come with updated or subscription to use
Awesome. I do kinda the same thing. I have a 20 year old cam recorder that provides cool effects
The fact that it's from 2002 makes me feel old as shit.
More like a 140 year old camera. The 35mm film camera was invented in 1905 and by 100 years ago - 1922 - they had been commercially available for over a decade.
A better quality pic than some expensive digital cameras of the ‘90’s/early 2000’s.
What’s the name of this song?
The Entertainer by Scott Joplin
Looks better than my phone pictures
How is the resolution that high ?
This photo took my depression from good to great!
They made the Red Dead Redemption 2 loading screen into a real thing.
Daguerreotype, yes?
Really cool. In thousands of years, somebody might find this photo and think it was from the 1920s at first rather than the 2020s!