Comments on: What is “wrong” with this photo?

By: 12 pt. plan – Quick LinkBites

12 pt. plan – Quick LinkBites — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 00:47:02 +0000

[...] Color photos of Russia 100 years ago? [...]

By: Daily Digest for July 13th | digital guerrilla

Daily Digest for July 13th | digital guerrilla — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:03:05 +0000

[...] Shared What is “wrong” with this photo? [...]

By: Things I Love: July 7 « Ordinary Day

Things I Love: July 7 « Ordinary Day — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:46:32 +0000

[...] Color photos from 1909… in RUSSIA! So [...]

By: Seth Rothstein

Seth Rothstein — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:25:14 +0000

Okay, New Advent…What is ‘wrong’ with these photos? We give up. Do you know something we don’t with the information? Is this some sort of trick or joke? If they are legit, why caption the title “What is ‘wrong’ with these photos? Please respond or change the intro title to something else, like “Amazing century old photos found…IN COLOR!” for example.
If nothing is wrong, thank you for a very interesting story!

By: carl

carl — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:22:37 +0000

wow, i thought it was a trick and i guessed nothing. i knew it was Russia but i figured there were still places like that in the present day. thats amazing.

By: Imtryingtohelp

Imtryingtohelp — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:11:55 +0000

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Mikhailovich_Prokudin-Gorskii

By: Aaron K

Aaron K — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:08:35 +0000

Life magazine recently released some photos taken by Hitler’s personal photographer, each of them in brilliant color. They were chilling photos to look at, and not one of them was about the war itself, but of Hitler and various members of the Nazi party. The pics look like they would be only a few days old.

By: tudza

tudza — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:05:08 +0000

A good picture, but yes it is surprising. What with a color process being developed thirty years previously and Russians not reading any scientific or artistic journals over all the time, it is truly remarkable. Such an added bonus that it is in focus.

By: Nopke

Nopke — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:19:06 +0000

Or was it that people did not want to see to their normal self on a picture. The painters normally did not paint them they way they were but made them look nicer (royalties, upper class, people with money).

This picture is the same painters in those days have painted way more often.

Did it take that much time to travel over the world? This new technique. Not impossible ofcourse. But the lack of interest was, however weird that may sound, or might be another reason. Techniques was not appreciated that much yet back then apparently. Plainly there for plain luxerous life styles. Painters were more simple. Or was there also a boycot of this technique?

Money it will be I guess. As many expensive techniques are not that widely spread yet among all people on this planet. Most will never benefit from techniques which actually were intended to do good to those (medical techniques e.g.). It’s still those with money who benefits the most from all new things. And show off. Or stay alive.

By: Nopke

Nopke — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:05:36 +0000

People can not see it at the pictures ofcourse. It could have been taken yesterday ofcourse (costumes and such, movies do it all the time .. in full colour they serve us the past ..). But the true point is that most people will think that coloured photography was not possibe then yet. The first known one is from 1861. Why it took so long I wonder .. money? The firs dutch coloured pictures I saw were from way later and with very different colours.. from normal people I mean. Did they prefer B&W? As daily life showed these colours already. B&W is considered more artistic quite often.
That’s the most interesting part of all of this as far as I’m concerned.