Black is the absence of color. White is a combination of all colors.Black and white are both colors, so technically...
Unless you're talking about pigments, in which case it's the complete opposite.
Color Photos from 1910!
- Thread starter Wanderlust
- Start date
Unless you're talking about pigments, in which case it's the complete opposite.
Here is a page of color photos from Egypt in 1920...
Color Photos of Egypt - 1920s
Take a look at the other stuff on this blog as well, it's super cool.
Wow...thanks!!!
That's an awesome drawing reference for me; I have a fanfic character of mine who wears desert clothing and most of the photos you see these days show Western-influenced fashions. This is the real deal.
That's what was so striking about the other photos--people still wearing traditional clothing as everyday wear. It's clear the culture had not been as homogenized as it is now, and in some ways I think that was a good thing. Not because people shouldn't mix or trade, but because of the diversity you get to see when not everybody "runs together," so to speak.
You take 3 photos of the scene using with a different color filter on each one. The trick is to make the lag time between each shot as short as possible to minimize any movement by people. This one shows what happens when part of the image doesn't line up.
Wow, these are magical.
You take 3 photos of the scene using with a different color filter on each one. The trick is to make the lag time between each shot as short as possible to minimize any movement by people. This one shows what happens when part of the image doesn't line up.
Don't know why (as if), but that girl on the left looks like some kind of ghostly apparition. I guess the camera does steal your soul! Run to the hills!
Here is a page of color photos from Egypt in 1920...
Color Photos of Egypt - 1920s
Take a look at the other stuff on this blog as well, it's super cool.
That's a wonderful site. I loved the abandoned pod city in Taiwan.
As UssGlenn explained, each photo required three separate exposures using different color filters. The subjects had to remain perfectly still and not change position between exposures. Obviously, that girl moved.
Prints would have been made by a process similar to Technicolor IB prints, using cyan, yellow and magenta dyes. I think.
I was pretending not to know, so I could say the spooky stuff. But thanks anyway.
Which is also why you almost never see a smile in early photography.. It's easier to hold a blank stare than to keep a smile exactly the same during the amount of time it used to take to get an exposure. Otherwise, you'd have a still body but a blurry mouth...
Beautiful indeed and very close to what can be seen in Albert Kahn's collection (around 72 000 autochromes).
Here a good sample of this collection : http://citynoise.org/article/10598
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
No, it isn't. Neither are colors per se. Black is simply the absence of color. White is the presence of all colors simultaneously.
This could turn into a very, very long post, but I'll keep it short.
1) Film is analog, it does not have a resolution in the exact way you're asking.
2) Finding the equivalent digital resolution that matches film is a tricky question. If you want to get REALLY technical you could say that these old photos probably have the same amount of info in them as a 50 megapixel digital camera. That is to say that the film has the ability to store that...whether the lenses he used are that detailed is another matter. 50 is just the theoretical number based on some rough math.
But in real-world usage it's probably fair to say that shooting with an 11 megapixel camera would give you a similar image for the ways his film was used. (Printed on a piece of paper, viewed on a website, put in a magazine, etc.)
3) So for the quick answer: Despite being far less detailed than film, having a camera that gives you something close to 4,000 x 3,000 would have made that guy happy.
4) I got ALL of these numbers by guessing what size his film was. Since I don't really know, they're probably all wrong anyway. Oh well!
Film does have resolution. It’s just that it depends on the grain of the emulsion and the physical size of the film format, rather than being X number of pixels.
Right, but he didn't ask about film, he's asking about the camera. And as I said, you can land yourself you somewhere between 11 and 50 on the digital scale, depending on how you count it. If that camera exposes two adjacent bits of film grain to the same light does that count as 1 or 2 bits of information? It's not right to just answer what the film is capable of; that's not the answer he's looking for.
Thus, there's no exact answer in "the way that he's asking."
They almost look like 2 color processing.
In fact, it is debatable. Black is not the absence of color, black is the absence of light. And light is not the same as color. Let me put it this way: are brown and pink colors? They are not a part of the color spectrum of light (one is a mix of blue, red, yellow, i believe, and other is of red and white). If you didn't know of the scientific explanation for light and vision would you then believe white is the sum of all colors? No, you wouldn't. Colors are just stuff we perceive and black and white are also thus colors. Kinda philosophical stuff.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Damn. I feel like a complete moron now because I was remembering basic video production, and one of the first things we learned was "Black is the absence of light," and I totally misspoke upthread.
That said, I was always taught that because of this, black is not a color because colors are reflected via light. Without light, there is no color. Black then, as the absence of light, precludes it from being a color.
Whether white is the presence of all colors or not, I guess could be debatable. I liken it to the rainbow pie we made in middle school science class. Once that thing started spinning fast, it was obvious all colors at once at a certain speed = white.
That said, I'll happily defer to a higher authority if I'm wrong.
That said, I was always taught that because of this, black is not a color because colors are reflected via light. Without light, there is no color. Black then, as the absence of light, precludes it from being a color.
Whether white is the presence of all colors or not, I guess could be debatable. I liken it to the rainbow pie we made in middle school science class. Once that thing started spinning fast, it was obvious all colors at once at a certain speed = white.
That said, I'll happily defer to a higher authority if I'm wrong.