tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post8068718806491232385..comments2009-07-10T16:39:52.400+09:00Comments on The Monster Flower: Old PicturesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-80746151086717743942008-09-21T22:24:00.000+09:002008-09-21T22:24:00.000+09:00I love old photos! I must scan the one of my grann...I love old photos! I must scan the one of my granny when she was in the Land Army holding a huge cabbage. <BR/><BR/>The b/w quality lends a different feel to it as well. When I look at photos of my parents when they were young it really does feel like they've come from the past. I sometimes think it won't feel so far back when our kids look at pictures of us when we were young - although the 70's kids' fashions might be a bit of a give-away.Emskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01695482838326498180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-28351932597306776972008-09-18T22:57:00.000+09:002008-09-18T22:57:00.000+09:00I also should add that we take photography for gra...I also should add that we take photography for granted in this modern era where photos are all around us and we have an idea in our heads how to "behave" in a photo. In those days, they probably had only seen a handful of photos and assumed that standing still was the normal way to pose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-45105735869546415782008-09-18T22:49:00.000+09:002008-09-18T22:49:00.000+09:00The stoic expressions are easily explainable. Came...The stoic expressions are easily explainable. Cameras (film) back then required very long exposures (usually a few seconds), they didn't have shutters but rather the photographer would take a cap off the lens to expose the film and put it back on after a period of time. Most people were told not to move or laugh otherwise ruin the photo.<BR/><BR/>It was not until the invention of the flash and faster film (I'm guessing around the 1930's) that you saw more candid photos. Even up until around 1960 the camera was a luxury item and most family photos were still taken in a studio.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-5784117285982459412008-09-18T22:47:00.000+09:002008-09-18T22:47:00.000+09:00I have a slide holder full of slides that my grand...I have a slide holder full of slides that my grandparents had for a number of years. Mostly b&w images of scenery, but a few people that I don't recognize. I have no idea why I carry them with me from house to house. Perhaps one day I will scan them.<BR/><BR/>The few images of people do show rather solemn faces, as you said. I think you are correct...now-a-days cameras have to record good times only it seems.<BR/><BR/>I used to be a manager of a photo lab for a large retailer years ago, and I remember that the vast majority of pictures we'd develop were of people having a good time. Except for the police evidence photos and the creepy old ladies that took pictures at every funeral they attended...badmoodguy (Бадмўдгуи)https://www.blogger.com/profile/00737755278975395898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-62433306999958604182008-09-18T20:22:00.000+09:002008-09-18T20:22:00.000+09:00I think the people look similar, but the looks on ...I think the people look similar, but the looks on their faces are different. The old pictures from the early 1900's that I linked to seem to be full of stoic and serious people for the most part. You see more people laughing, smiling, and carrying on in modern pictures. It's as if they feel they camera has to record good times. You only see real emotions in candid shots or pictures where people are unaware of the camera.Orchid64https://www.blogger.com/profile/07132543155589881288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398781353996043657.post-57103144626844279042008-09-18T15:46:00.000+09:002008-09-18T15:46:00.000+09:00What strikes me the most when I look at old photos...What strikes me the most when I look at old photos of strangers is that many of the faces are similar to people I know now. I guess 100 or 200 years is still only a split second in the evolutionary timeline.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com