14 Rare Color Photos From the FSA-OWI
Even today, many documentary photographers will tell you they are influenced by the works of the Farm Security Administration in the 1930s and 40s. Under the direction of Roy Emerson Stryker, the FSA sent photographers to document the plight of the rural farmer during the Great Depression and the progress of New Deal programs. When the U.S. entered World War II, the photography program continued under the Office of War Information (OWI).
The best-known FSA photographs are in black and white. Less commonly seen are the color photos by FSA and OWI photographers, shot between 1939 and 1945. Below we present a selection from the works Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, FSA-OWI Collection.
Photo by Russell Lee. Jack Whinery and his family, homesteaders, Pie Town, New Mexico, 1940.
Photo by Alfred T. Palmer. Carpenter at work on Douglas Dam, Tennessee, a Tennessee Valley Authority project, 1942.
Photo by John Vachon. Boy near Cincinnati, Ohio, 1942 or 1943.
Photo by Marjory Collins. A “camouflage class” at New York University, where men and women are preparing for jobs in the Army or in industry by making models from aerial photographs and work out camouflage schemes, 1943.
Photo by Alfred T. Palmer. Woman machinist, Douglas Aircraft Company, Long Beach, California, 1942.
Photo by Alfred T. Palmer. A member of a construction crew building a new 33,000-volt electric power line into Fort Knox, Kentucky, 1942.
Photo by Jack Delano. Sharecroppers chop cotton on rented land near White Plains, Greene County, Georgia, 1941.
Photo by John Vachon. Dr. Schreiber of San Augustine giving a typhoid inoculation at a rural school, San Augustine County, Texas, 1943.
Photo by Russell Lee. Barbeque dinner at the Pie Town, New Mexico Fair, 1940.
Photo by Alfred T. Palmer. Crane operator at the TVA’s Douglas Dam, Tennessee, 1942.
Photo by John Vachon. Workers leaving Pennsylvania shipyards, Beaumont, Texas, 1943.
Photo by Jack Delano. James Lynch, a roundhouse worker for the Chicago and North Western Railway Company , Proviso Yard, Chicago, 1942.
Photo by Jack Delano. Vermont state fair, Rutland, 1941.
Photo by Arthur Rothstein. An instructor explains the operation of a parachute to student pilots, Meacham Field, Fort Worth, Texas, 1942.
Tags: FSA, FSA Images, Great Depression, Great Depression Photos, New Deal Photos, OWI
March 10th, 2009 at 12:58 pm EGMT+5
Thank you for posting these! Great start to the morning.
March 10th, 2009 at 1:10 pm EGMT+5
Great. Thanks. It’s worth mentioning that many of these photos–John Vachon’s “Negro Boy Near Cincinnati,” for instance–are available freely from the Library of Congress FSA/OWI website as high-resolution tiff files. (After all, the people of the United States of America own the copyright.) I speak from experience when I say that they Photoshop and print well. Here’s a link to Vachon’s photo and the downloadable file: http://tinyurl.com/VachonFSAPhoto
March 10th, 2009 at 1:14 pm EGMT+5
Thanks, John. The LOC archive is a great resource, and all of these photos and many others are freely available as high-res files. You can also find them following the link in the intro this post.
March 10th, 2009 at 1:25 pm EGMT+5
Just beautiful-the faces of Americans!
March 10th, 2009 at 3:36 pm EGMT+5
These are so great to see. Some of these are very strong images that stand up after all these years.
March 10th, 2009 at 3:56 pm EGMT+5
Very Nice
March 10th, 2009 at 7:28 pm EGMT+5
shopped
March 10th, 2009 at 7:39 pm EGMT+5
Awesome.
March 10th, 2009 at 7:50 pm EGMT+5
re:
“Great. Thanks. It’s worth mentioning that many of these photos–John Vachon’s “Negro Boy Near Cincinnati,” for instance–are available freely from the Library of Congress FSA/OWI website”
I think you just wanted to type the word “Negro.” You couldn’t find another reference photograph?
March 10th, 2009 at 8:11 pm EGMT+5
Bella-
Grow up, seriously.
March 10th, 2009 at 8:17 pm EGMT+5
Are you sure these were shot in color? I saw these a while back on another site that said they were colored using photoshop. I think they would be much more washed out by now unless they were fixed for hours and never saw the light of day.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:11 pm EGMT+5
yes they were shot in color. they were shot on kodachrome which is incredibly stable media. unlike slide film of today, kodachrome does not fade.
also, i just want to say that the title of this post calls these photos rare, but the fact that they are kept in the national archives and are available over the internet for free download (they are public domain) makes them not all that rare.
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/fsahtml/fahome.html
most of these photos were included in a traveling exhibition called “Bound For Glory.” I saw it in Lexington, KY and it was a beautiful show. you can buy the catalog by the same name of the exhibition.
http://www.amazon.com/Bound-Glory-America-Color-1939-43/dp/0810943484/ref=pd_bbs_sr_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236737320&sr=8-4
i highly recommend purchasing this book. i have a copy and it is one of my favorites in my entire photo library.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:35 pm EGMT+5
Yes – these pictures were shot in b/w then colorized.
March 11th, 2009 at 12:35 am EGMT+5
I agree with Bella, the caption for the image above just says boy near Cincinnati. I have been hearing that word much more frequently – usually from older folks – like over 70.
The pie-town series is incredible. I’m not sure where they immigrated from but the National Geographic series on them was very interesting.
March 11th, 2009 at 1:54 am EGMT+5
Sure we need more revisionist history. A work of art has a word that is now outdated and offensive, better change it. Would you like to go through all written record of the word ‘fag’ for cigarettes to be blacked out in books too?
March 11th, 2009 at 3:55 am EGMT+5
pic 6 – Mel Gibson :]
March 11th, 2009 at 4:30 am EGMT+5
“Sure we need more revisionist history. A work of art has a word that is now outdated and offensive, better change it. Would you like to go through all written record of the word ‘fag’ for cigarettes to be blacked out in books too?”
“Blacked” Out, Ryan? Nice. Sure you don’t want to “revise” that remark?
Yes, I am totally kidding. :)
March 11th, 2009 at 5:28 am EGMT+5
@Colorshop Kid
No. The post above and the Library of Congress site that it links to clearly state that these are colour photographs.
@Ch @Ryan
Bella is on to something. The caption above clearly says “Boy near Cincinnati”. No mention of the word “negro”. Someone just had to get his anonymous internet kicks anyway he could.
March 11th, 2009 at 5:40 am EGMT+5
Really the Photographs are very fine.
March 11th, 2009 at 5:48 am EGMT+5
@Bella. You are – sadly – not very bright. Ten seconds of googling will tell you that the original picture is actually called that, and that it’s a famous picture in its own right.
http://www.loc.gov/shop/index.php?action=cCatalog.showItem&cid=23&scid=155&iid=3275&PHPSESSID=98
http://www.everystockphoto.com/photo.php?imageId=2381581
March 11th, 2009 at 6:36 am EGMT+5
Do some research. The title of that well-known photograph is “Negro boy, near Cincinnati, Ohio” – given to it by the photographer John Vachon.
Google that and dozens of references appear. Maybe you want to speak to Amazon about their description:
“”http://www.amazon.com/COLOR-CINCINNATI-VACHON-Studio-Framing/dp/B001DYQ9WA
Get a life
March 11th, 2009 at 7:42 am EGMT+5
It should be pointed out that while unusual, colour photographs from the 1940s and later are not really rare. Colour photography has come a long way since the Lumière brothers introduced autochrome in the early 20th century, but by the 1930s and 1940s it was possible to get stunning results with the films and processes of the time.
I am a big fan of Jack Delano’s work, particularly of his work in the Chicago railyards. You can find a lot of his work in the Library of Congress’s Flickr photostream here: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=jack%20delano&w=8623220%40N02
March 11th, 2009 at 9:25 am EGMT+5
Wonderful photography. Moving, and memorable.A time capsule of an historic era in the history of the United States.
March 11th, 2009 at 9:26 am EGMT+5
All stylized in a weirdly staged way.
They give me the creeps.
March 11th, 2009 at 9:40 am EGMT+5
Beautiful old shots.
Lest anyone forget, The Wizard of Oz was released in 1939. What vivid colors there were in that!
At the same time, some of these, particularly the “Carpenter at work on Douglas Dam” shot, look a lot like modern post-production. Not saying they are; they just have a look like that.
Why is everyone going on about the word “negro”? It is not a derogatory term, you know. It’s just a biological fact. Nowadays, the photographer wouldn’t call the shot by that name, but since he did, SFW? If anyone wants to take my picture and include the word “caucasian” in its title, please feel free. Sheesh!
March 11th, 2009 at 9:49 am EGMT+5
WOW!
nice pictures!
March 11th, 2009 at 10:13 am EGMT+5
Excellent photos, specially the photo by Russell Lee. Barbeque dinner at the Pie Town, New Mexico Fair, 1940.
March 11th, 2009 at 10:19 am EGMT+5
Fake…how can you go back in time and snap shots with a slr? This is defiantly done at Warner bros studio.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:06 am EGMT+5
Just FYI (for some here) Kodachrome was introduced in 1935 , 35mm Kodachrome in 1936. A note about Kodachrome: “Kodachrome slides over fifty years old still retain accurate color and grain.” Wikipedia is a good thing
March 11th, 2009 at 11:34 am EGMT+5
epic photos!
i didnt know there were color photographs in the 1940’s
March 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am EGMT+5
I love the “old time” photos!
March 11th, 2009 at 12:53 pm EGMT+5
It’s sad that at PDN – where people should know better – there’s so much ignorance about the history and usage of color film.
These images were not “colorized” in any way, shape, or form. They are scans of the original Kodachrome.
March 11th, 2009 at 1:35 pm EGMT+5
For all of you thought that these were colorized…wrong. My father had a color camera that he bought in 1941, he used it till the 60’s. He also developed and colorized photos, they do not look like this when they are colorized. He was a real camera buff and had several.
All of you need to follow Joe’s website link it has all of the original photos there.
To those of you who thought the word “negro” was some sort of internet hoax…study your history or at least talk to someone over the age of 60, they will tell you that up until the 1960’s black people were called negros. For heavens sake people educate yourselves a little before you post your comments on here.
To the person who posted these wonderful old photos, thank you so much. As you can see there is much to be learned from wonderful old photos like these. Don’t be afraid to use the proper words for photos…history is what it is, if we try and change it we can not learn from it.
March 11th, 2009 at 1:42 pm EGMT+5
negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negronegro negro negro negro negro negro negro
It’s just a word, get over it. Using that word doesn’t always mean it’s out of disrespect. In 1942 you WOULD call an “African American” boy a Negro so it makes perfect sense to use that term to preserve the history of the moment.
It’s too bad those were shopped. There are tons of non shopped color images from that era, surprised the FSA didn’t shoot any color. I know the WPA photographers also didn’t shoot much color..
March 11th, 2009 at 2:14 pm EGMT+5
Hey,
I’m a photoshop expert, been using it since Photoshop 1 and if these were hand coloured then they were done by a god in the field over a period of years. The colours are too natural, too perfect. I’m also a photographer and colour has been around since the 19th century so Nah.
I would challenge anyone to be able to take one of these photos, de-saturate it and then re colour it in photoshop and achieve the same degree of realism.
I’m not saying that these particular images haven’t been ‘tweaked’ for the web but they a were DEFINATELY shot IN colour.
March 11th, 2009 at 2:23 pm EGMT+5
Hi, I’m the editor who put this photo gallery together. I decided not to use the word “negro” when entering the caption of that photograph because I thought it would distract from the image. The word is out of date and sounds harsh to today’s ears. I also considered the fact that none of the white people were identified by their races in the other photo captions. Let’s try to keep the comments on topic. Thanks.
March 11th, 2009 at 3:21 pm EGMT+5
To Old Photo Buff et all,
Certain is these photos were not “colorized”. All these photos were most likely shot on Kodachrome 25ASA-ISO color transparency film sheet (no roll) using a 4×5 Graflex Press or a medium format Graflex Century or Speed Graphic.
The dye couplers and emulsions used to imprint the polyester base “slide” Kodachrome
were the sharpest, more color stable and fade resistant to date than any newer slide film made by Kodak or Fujichrome. Kodak used a process called K-14, a predecessor of the common E-6 slide processing rendering a unique look, deep contrast, salmon hued colors. Beautiful Stuff. They are Markers of an Era. (eg:Life Magazine covers). The drawback was their narrow latitude as any positive emulsion (easy to underexpose- One stop of forgiveness). But remember, they never where color cameras, only color or B/W films. The view or reflex camera is just a mechanical “Camera Obscura” that gathers light through a shutter/iris/lens. The film stock holds the color or the grayscale (B/W) emulsion that converts your Point of View (POV) into a memorable image.
George Leon, Cinematographer
March 11th, 2009 at 3:52 pm EGMT+5
Jeesh…well, controversy aside, I think this is a great collection of photographs you’ve assembled here.
There’s something weirdly surreal about seeing photos from this era in color. I guess I’ve always been so used to seeing these kinds of things in black and white, that it’s weird to be reminded that the world actually WAS colorful back then, haha. And very much so!
Beautiful photos and altogether very interesting.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:00 pm EGMT+5
Wow! Great photos. As a 23 year old I can say that I have actually never imagined the 40’s in color. Isn’t that a shame? Common sense tells me things were surely in color, I guess I always imagined that era as dark, bleak, black and white ya know. Amazing how a few photos can completely change my idea of what that era was like.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:04 pm EGMT+5
well Kendra took the words right out of my mouth..she seems cool…ha
March 11th, 2009 at 4:06 pm EGMT+5
Chopping cotton….all i saw was a dry field that was being howed in, someone forgot to add the cotton
March 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm EGMT+5
really great post. some of them were so surreal, that they almost didn’t seem real. the dark faces and the light hitting the subjects. I would have guessed that these were the work of hollywood staging if I hadn’t already known that these were probably the first color photos that I’ve ever seen from this era. I wonder what types of camera they used to take the photographs.
March 11th, 2009 at 6:49 pm EGMT+5
Daryl Lang – Thanks for your thoughtful approach to to the caption of that photograph. I wish the other posters could have been as classy as you were and kept the focus on the photos.
These photos are fantastic – historic, personal, and well done.
Some of them, especially “Carpenter at work” and “Woman machinist”, as so sharp that they look as if they could be modern recreations of old photos.
March 11th, 2009 at 7:06 pm EGMT+5
These are all wonderful photographs from a bygone era. Wish people would just enjoy them as such. I certainly did. Thanks for the post.
March 11th, 2009 at 7:10 pm EGMT+5
Thank you. These photographs reminded me of the fabulous color photographs my father took during and after the war years. He discovered Agfa film in Germany while helping with liberation of the camps.
March 11th, 2009 at 7:25 pm EGMT+5
These were wonderful. Such stories they tell. Thank you for posting.
March 11th, 2009 at 8:08 pm EGMT+5
thank you!
March 11th, 2009 at 8:26 pm EGMT+5
Thank you for posting these lovely pictures. They really do tell a story. So poignant…
March 11th, 2009 at 9:36 pm EGMT+5
I remember some of these “events” vividly, especially the homemade clothing in some of the pix. In primary flight training at Ballinger, Texas in 1944, we didn’t have those fancy white coveralls shown in one pix. Also, the two on the right had flown solo. This is signified by their goggles being worn up on their helmets instead of down around their necks as dodos (a flightless bird).
March 11th, 2009 at 10:22 pm EGMT+5
Captivating…real life pics, of real people…
Awesome..
March 11th, 2009 at 11:08 pm EGMT+5
‘Negro’ shouldn’t be used because ‘caucasian’ isn’t used to describe the photos of non-African-American people, yet a photo of a machinist is captioned ‘Woman Machinist’ and the photos of males are not labeled as men? Double standard if you ask me.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:15 am EGMT+5
ernie————
yeah, dem folks be hoeing, not “chopping” cotton. you look close, you c’n see dem little greenies in th’ dirt. dey be only ’bout 2inches high. see it now?
March 12th, 2009 at 12:44 am EGMT+5
that crane operator… seems like he’s wearing a USMC desert 8-point cover.
…and the picture seems to high-res to be from the 40’s, especially from the lighting scheme.
but hey, maybe the not. whatever.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:57 am EGMT+5
Ummm George Leon…might help to read my post, I said they were NOT colorized. You may be a cinematographer, but you sadly can not read.
I’ll say again, these are wonderful photos and a gentle reminder good or bad, how life was during those years. Idiotic comments aside these are just wonderful, I spent over an hour looking at more at the Library of Congress’ website.
Thanks again for the post Mr. Lang!
March 12th, 2009 at 3:05 am EGMT+5
Looking at these photos, for some reason, stirs up great emotion in me. I’m not sure why.
Anyhow, thanks a bunch for posting them.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:09 am EGMT+5
beautiful snaps
its such a nice collection
March 12th, 2009 at 4:57 am EGMT+5
For me seeing color photos of these people makes them terribly human. I want to know what happened to them, especially the family in the group sit-down photo. B&W photos to me make people more for the ages while these make them more for the moment, more vulnerable. Thank you.
March 12th, 2009 at 5:59 am EGMT+5
My particular favorites are the Alfred T. Palmer shots. Definitely staged, but I have no doubt they were taken with regular people at real locations. I think his use of lighting, at least through my contemporary eyes, gives a certain level of celebrity, or dignity, to the subjects, much as was the intentions of many of the FSA-OWI photographers. Particularly, the wartime industry shots were taken during a period where it was important to broadcast images of people working hard to overcome both diplomatic and economic hardships.
These images are a historical treasure and I thank Daryl for posting these rare, if only because we are so barraged by inferior imagery, beauties.
And, despite the skeptics, these are the real deal and not Photoshop’d. Think about it, with the availability of technology, what’s the point in lying about it?
March 12th, 2009 at 7:56 am EGMT+5
Hey – doesn’t anyone know that up until the early 20th century the whole world WAS black and white? What the pictures of that era show are COLOR pictures of a BLACK AND WHITE world. Once color film was commercially available, the whole world had to upgrade and paint everything from faces to trees and the sky (lots of paint up there, I’ll bet). Geez, you’d think someone would do a little RESEARCH before they posted here…
…and yes, this is Mr. Sarcasm doing the talking.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:11 am EGMT+5
are you sure these were shot in color? the “Carpenter at work” and “Crane operator” photos look like they cam straight out of Strobist!
March 12th, 2009 at 10:18 am EGMT+5
I agree with Moo. Get a life Bella! Go hang out at abortion clinics.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:50 am EGMT+5
Are all of these available at the loc in tiff form? I only see three hi res tiffs on that site.
March 12th, 2009 at 11:13 am EGMT+5
i do not believe all of these are real. you can’t fool me.
March 12th, 2009 at 1:10 pm EGMT+5
The mother and her two youngest children from the first picture are also in the Pie Town dinner photograph, in the background behind the women serving/preparing the food. Very awesome.
March 12th, 2009 at 1:14 pm EGMT+5
Don’t have a problem with editing the photo caption since, as mentioned, the excised word is out of date and potentially distracting, but since the subject has been brought up, “negro” is simply the spanish word for “black.”
It’s the unmentionable corruption of that word that was (is?) the real problem . . . .
March 12th, 2009 at 1:44 pm EGMT+5
this reminds me of when American’s worked hard.
March 12th, 2009 at 2:02 pm EGMT+5
Fantastic photos!
Love the colours, the lighting, the scenes.
March 12th, 2009 at 2:28 pm EGMT+5
I appreciate the pictures which are all moving in their own way. Thank you for sharing them.
I am a little saddened by the extranious comments. It is a puzzle that is worth looking into if you are one drawn into or expose others to aggression.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:15 pm EGMT+5
Beautiful photographs! These should be put in a museum!
March 12th, 2009 at 3:36 pm EGMT+5
Love the pictures, but to weigh in on a heated argument, I feel it is wrong to change the name of the photograph. A title can say a lot about the time when a picture was taken, and to simply rename the photo boy is nearly the same as renaming the Female Machinist as “Machinist.”
March 12th, 2009 at 3:49 pm EGMT+5
Wow. Did everyone here put on their cranky pants this morning?
Beautiful shots. They aren’t photoshopped. Not certain why three is such interest in stating otherwise.
The color really is interesting – we are so accustomed to viewing that world in black (can I say that?) and white.
March 12th, 2009 at 4:35 pm EGMT+5
Pictures from that era are many but this is the first color pics I’ve seen. Good Job!!
March 12th, 2009 at 8:07 pm EGMT+5
I really enjoyed these! Very interesting!
Can really feel the history here by seeing these… more so than
the common b&w-out of focus historical pics.
I see these and think…”whoa, all these peop’s are probably dead now,
(you know you’re thinkin’ that too) and it looks like the picture was taken not so
long ago”.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:53 pm EGMT+5
Back in my youth, in the early years of my working life, until not that long ago really, a nurse who happened to be a man was fomally called “a male nurse”, women were never called “female nurses”. Teachers who happened to be male, secretaries who were male, come on people,help me out on this, give me your examples, were called “male……(insert profession)”. This signifies what?
And the photo captioned Negro Boy, or in this case just Boy near Cincinnati. All the uptight comments on this are from the right wing of the Politically Correct spectrum, right, or should I say correct?
March 12th, 2009 at 10:32 pm EGMT+5
Wow! Amazing photography!
March 13th, 2009 at 1:10 am EGMT+5
this has been a great visit site all cuss words aside this is dopeness at it best
March 13th, 2009 at 1:11 am EGMT+5
I couldn’t give a damn about the photos being either color or black-and-white.
They’re stunning, and they are deeply emotional and thought-provoking.
I was born at the end of The Great Depression, and these photos are a part of my beloved parents’ history, and I’m thankful they’ve been shared with others. Wish these were shared in every school in the United States of America but, of course, we have one of the lousiest education systems in the world, as “proved” by the continuing dumbing down of our nation. It makes me sad to see these hard-working souls, some of whom may have thought they were a part of bettering our country.
March 13th, 2009 at 2:15 am EGMT+5
It’s not hard at all for me to see my grandfather in some of the faces in these pictures. He would have been building boxcars for the Western Fruit railroad in this era. I’m inspired by the dogged determination expressed on the faces of these blue collar heroes who got a leg up from the New Deal and never stopped climbing.
BTW, Susie, I make frequent use out of FSA and L of C images in my powerpoint presentations as US History teacher. I don’t presume to speak for the rest of the country, but there’s nothing “lousy” about what’s happening in my classroom.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:10 am EGMT+5
Excellent pictures shared.
Remembering the importance of photography. How much it is serving the world at large.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:40 am EGMT+5
I think the “woman machinist” is actually just checking the dimensions/roundness of a bearing house with a watch.
She’s not exactly dressed as a machinist, and there’s no swarf [that I can see] on the bench.
March 13th, 2009 at 7:50 am EGMT+5
Awesome photos. They look really vivid. Like something from a modern movie-set.
…and as always, I love how the P.C. crowd are having a field-day debating what you are and aren’t allowed to say. I thought you guys in the states had freedom of speech?
Oh well, I suppose not.
Let’s edit out all the cigarettes in photos too, it’s a little offensive to people with asthma! Seriously u gais!
Lol.
Keep this up and you’re gonna be left with a bunch of people tip-toeing around agreeing with each other all the time. What a horrible world.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:00 am EGMT+5
Thanks to everyone that ruined this experience by using this as a soapbox…Beautiful photo’s reguardless.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:41 am EGMT+5
Great pics! Just ordered Bound-Glory-America book for my photo collection!
March 13th, 2009 at 11:00 am EGMT+5
I think the “woman machinist” is actually just checking the dimensions/roundness of a bearing house with a watch.
She’s not exactly dressed as a machinist, and there’s no swarf [that I can see] on the bench..
March 13th, 2009 at 1:24 pm EGMT+5
These photos are so wonderful.
Maybe people don’t realize it but during the depression, the US hired people to work. Many of these were photographers, who were sent out by the Farm Security Administratin to record the United States during the Great Depression. There are many of these photos in the Library of Congress. I took a class on the Great Depression, and my memory isn’t that perfect but if you surf around you can find a lot of evidence of the work people did in that time. Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange,
Many old films were produced under the WPA, well, tons of stuff was done under the WPA. Timberline Lodge was built, people joined the Civilian Conservation Corps and built bridges, national parks, they made movies and wrote books and took photographs. It was a rich cultural time. I know that the Tennessee Valley Authority developed during the Depression, that is the big flood that happens at the end of the film, O’Brother Where Art Thou.
People used the term Negro too. It is historically accurate, and is a good reminder of the conditions of the times. I think we need I am under 60, and it was sort of fading out during my childhood.
March 13th, 2009 at 1:40 pm EGMT+5
These are great photos of the most productive generation ever born. They worked extremely hard in often terrible conditions to leave us a better life. My grandparents were “WHITE Irish” migrant workers during this era who followed the fruit crop from Arkansas to Michigan. When not working in the vegetable plots, berry fields or orchards my grandfather worked as a form carpenter on road and bridge construction jobs. These photos remind me of B&W shots in the family collection. They are awesome and I am also strangely stirred by the images. Just my own comments on the controversy; you can call me a hillbilly or a mick if you want, I am proud of my heritage and can’t be offended. Who these people were has made me who I am. The cotton will be chopped after it is endlessly hoed, agonizingly picked and brought in from the fields about 140 days after the photo was taken. And the “woman machinist” likely efficiently blew the shavings off the tool rest prior to checking the depth of her machining with the dial indicator she is holding (looks much like a watch to someone who is not a machinist). Great comments everyone, oddly your posts have brought a sense of tranquility into my morning . (;ck
March 13th, 2009 at 1:52 pm EGMT+5
These are just beautiful. My favorite is the bbq with all the desserts. I just don’t think of that time period in color and just to see the fabric colors of the clothes are are amazing.
March 13th, 2009 at 1:59 pm EGMT+5
OBTW…………………………….Note that none of these folks has a BMI (Body Mass Index) over 20. They were slender and tough. Same photos today would show a much different American. Today we are fat, lazy and whiney. Without some serious changes, the most recent generation will be the first to live shorter, less quality lives than their parents. They really were the good ole days. (;ck
March 13th, 2009 at 5:22 pm EGMT+5
I’m a computer builder and my girlfriend is a digital designer. Neither one of us have any suspicions as to whether these have been shopped or not. In fact, those who’ve claimed they are seem to merely be trying to talk with the big boys and aren’t actually familiar with the capabilities of Photoshop.
This are real, color, photographs and they are beautiful. Thanks to the contributor.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:37 pm EGMT+5
Technical reasons aside, these pictures are startling and bring back a flood of memories from early childhood when I looked up into faces just like them. What a journey we’ve taken as a country. These pics are valuable as are the stories of those who lived during those times. Good ol’days? I am not so sure. Jim Crow law. Fascism. Institutionalized racism and sexism. Polio. Influenza. Hunger and the Great Depression to name a few.
It seems to me that the value in these pictures is the telling of all of our history. Every hard dirty struggle. America is often best when our backs are up against the wall and we join together to achieve. These pics help prove that. Thanks.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:00 pm EGMT+5
Wow! It really takes us back to the Great Depression. I do wonder what pictures the future generations will see in the current financial crisis.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:03 pm EGMT+5
I am a Photoshop EXPERT! (all caps because i rarely toot my own horn about any accomplishments i have achieved). That being said…bbbeeeuuuutiful color photos and so much interest in the clothing, backgrounds etc. One note for those who are ashamed of the use of the word “negro”? I would note the photo of the shipyard workers leaving for the day? You will see that the line to the right is exclusively for the ‘coloreds’. THAT you can feel sorrow for.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:13 pm EGMT+5
Sunning images. From living in the 21st century we scoff at what the quality of color photography would have been some 60 years ago. Might it be that we say we prefer to black and white because there were so few color photos of that time. I believe that many a photographer might have jumped at the chance to shoot color because of the added realism.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:54 pm EGMT+5
As a historian of the FSA, I’d like to comment on a few of the interesting issues raised in the string.
First, the question of the authenticity of these images as color pictures. As a one-time student of Russell Lee, I can attest not only to their authenticity but to their history. Late in the FSA’s time– as it approached a new identity as part of the Office of War Information, the OWI, the FSA sent out a few of its photographers with the new higher-speed (ASA 25) 35mm Kodachrome. Previous interest in the use of color (Kodachrome was first introduced in 1936 as 35mm film useable in Leicas) had been scotched by the question of reproduction– the FSA mandate was to produce pictures to be used in publications, including newspapers and magazines, and there was concern that the color transparencies would be difficult “sells.”
So the images are entirely “color.” They may look, to our eyes, “colorized,” but a close look at the originals shows that the color balance and saturation was far different in 1939 than the cooler, less saturated color films of the later 20th century.
As to the “photoshopping” issue. I’ve looked pretty carefully at these– as originals, as high-end scans from the LC, and in these reproductions. They don’t look inaccurate, to my eyes. They may have been modified for better web viewing, but I’m happy to say I don’t see cropping or distortion.
Finally, as to the issue of the use of the word “Negro.” A search of the LC database reveals that approximately 1.5% of the images contained the word “Negro” in the title, and the near-exact percentage among the color pictures. Many of these were made with a very specific social and political agenda in mind. The FSA encountered a great deal of racism as it sought to fulfill its mission, and there was a great deal of debate both within the FSA ranks and among New Dealers more generally about whether showing African-Americans helped by the New Deal would foment racist response and opposition to the New Deal. Photographers like John Vachon and Russell Lee, however, actively supported an agenda that presented African-Americans (who were then called Negro if one (black or white) were speaking with respect and formality– “colored” more informally) as among those suffering, and among those receiving the help of the New Deal. Now, to what an extent the New Deal politicians were thinking of the African-American political support is also a matter of much complexity.
The point here, however, is that the word “Negro” appended to the caption was not racist at the time, and I would suggest that fidelity to the language of the past is important. Without knowing that there is a reason the word appeared originally, and that it was pointed, and was meant by some (Lee and Vachon, for example) as part of a larger campaign to bring the “invisible sufferers” into public view, would impoverish the context within which these pictures were made.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:11 pm EGMT+5
I agree on the one point that these photos seem colourized, but I believe that is merely due to the type of camera and film used, and the fact that we’re not used to seeing photos from that era so that they look surreal and/or colourized.
In regards of the debate over the word “negro”, I understand and do not question the fact that the photo in question was originally titled “Negro Boy”. I also can see where this would take away from the picture itself.
Now, can we all grow up and stop fussing over a word and if a picture is faked, please?
March 13th, 2009 at 10:48 pm EGMT+5
wow, those are immensely good.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:33 pm EGMT+5
Wolfsinger’s exceptions noted…………………………………shows that I was born in the 60’s not the 20’s. I mean’t well…………………..(;ck
March 13th, 2009 at 11:37 pm EGMT+5
A lot of these photos look staged… it may just be me, but my father is a professional photagrapher, and just the way some of the photos are set up look fake. like the second one of the man drilling the hole. i just can’t see that being a real color photo from that era.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:39 pm EGMT+5
Can’t we all just give it up! Words are words, humans are all humans, ethnicity in a reality not an excuse for us all to choose sides. Aren’t we all home sapiens?
GET OVER IT!
March 14th, 2009 at 12:40 am EGMT+5
Seriously, think about it though. Back then to go around as a photographer taking color shots would have been an incredibly big deal. And if these guys were government employees then they most certainly had government funding for things like clunky-mobile flash units and exposure plates and what not, these definitely look large-format. I do not believe these were posed, probably staged on location with the subjects actually being workers and laborers (back then this would have been quite the big deal to be in a color photograph). These are definitely real, I mean, they ARE. The doubters can be just that, these are truly one of a kind photographs of an era we all wish we lived in.
March 14th, 2009 at 1:39 am EGMT+5
Can we remove “boy”s comment please I find it very offensive, incorrect and nothing to do with these wonderful photos?
March 14th, 2009 at 10:39 am EGMT+5
The “boy” description fits the child to a “T”. What do you call a black girl?…Girl?
You and your counter-racism stupity in finding offensive words calling a boy a boy! A boy is a boy is a boy.
March 14th, 2009 at 12:25 pm EGMT+5
Do you have any color pics of Noah or Adam & Eve?
March 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm EGMT+5
i agree with joe cool>>>>… ppl y’all blow to much out of proportion,,,negro is a dam$%^ site better than the other n word<<<Dont forget, this was taken in the 40s when the other n word was more appropriate,,,why carry on so,,, It was ,what it was>>>>>>>>>.it’s not like it happned yesterday,, oh then of coarse it would have to be african american,,,GEESH ppl
March 14th, 2009 at 3:02 pm EGMT+5
old photo buff, stfu! nobody wants to hear you whining about stuff like that. i cant believe that people still get upset by what they come across on the internet. there is a lot of offensive and vulgar stuff on the internet. just get over it and get used to it! and as for these pictures, they look shopped as hell! theyre great pictures but i dont believe for one second that they are authentic.
March 14th, 2009 at 4:21 pm EGMT+5
FAKE. I can tell by the pixels and having come across quite a few Shops in my day.
March 14th, 2009 at 5:34 pm EGMT+5
I think some people are misunderstanding the ‘colourized’ claims that have been made here. There’s no disputing that the photos were shot in colour, but there has definitely been some digital work done. Something that should be pretty obvious to most people who have seen more than a few film photographs.
I’m not an expert, but I have a good eye. I can say I’ve never seen any film photographs with this kind of crisp, digital looking colour. Some of them just don’t have the film ‘look’. As someone else mentioned, the Strobist-esque photo of the dam worker simply looks as though it’s been shot with a Canon 5D and multiple flashes. I have a feeling they didn’t have the kind of flash technology back then to produce this kind of shot. Outside of the studio at least.
The moon photos, shot with the Hasselblad 500 series, medium format cameras (I have a 500C/M myself) are some of the best quality film photos I’ve ever seen. That camera produced amazing images for the time. These shots, taken nearly 30 years previously, look 30 times better. Something about that doesn’t seem to makes sense to me.
Whether they were taken in 1941 or 2001, some brilliant photos.
March 14th, 2009 at 5:54 pm EGMT+5
Omg I can not believe how small minded most of you are and how most of your focus is on a word or if someone is trying to pull your leg with the whole colour thing. Really can’t you appreciate art for art? Beautiful photo’s of America’s Heritage too bad the comments reflect how the people of the States are seen today!
March 14th, 2009 at 10:40 pm EGMT+5
One of these photos was in my school textbook.
That’s very interesting to me.
March 15th, 2009 at 4:29 am EGMT+5
These are great photos, thank you so much for sharing them.
I especially liked the family group shot. I too tend to think of that era in terms of the famous black & white photos. These are very evocative in a different way. Maybe the poster who said the black & white seems to be more “for the ages” & the color seems to be more “for the moment” was on to something.
At any rate, thank you!
March 15th, 2009 at 4:50 am EGMT+5
I DID NOT WANT THE WORD BOY REMOVED I WANTED THE COMMENT MADE USING THE “N” WORD REMOVED, THAT COMMENT WAS MADE BY A PERSON CALLING HIMSELF BOY!!!!!!! Look above my comment at March 13, 2009 10:20pm. Instead of getting the foul word removed I was called foul words for no reason!!
ANON & all the rest of you who think these are “shopped” it’s called kodachrome, it’s a type of color camera used in the late 1930’s and 1940’s. READ PEOPLE!!
PROUD TO BE CANADIAN; sadly you are right about some of us, but not all of us.
DARYL LANG; can you edit this thing I was enjoying this post until some of these comments are being left in, now the photos are getting lost in all the insults, foul words, and ignorance.
March 15th, 2009 at 5:55 am EGMT+5
Photos are wonderful to look at and realize that there is a resurgence in this style of photography.
March 15th, 2009 at 7:44 am EGMT+5
These photos are quite stunning. I have color photos from my grandparent’s collections that look just as vivid as these after being scanned. The reason these look so good is because of the modern technology they were scanned on. I bet a print off the original slide would look similar, but not the same. They probably wouldn’t be as sharp.
As for all the “negro” talk, it’s a shame that America has turned into this incredibly Politically Correct country. Why do we feel the need to erase the reality of that time. We will be losing a part of ourselves if we constantly revise and sanitize the world to protect our fragile psyches. The way to eradicate racism is not to pretend it doesn’t exist, but to treat each other with respect and honor. The term “negro” was respectful for the time much more than the other words that could have been used. Jeez!
March 15th, 2009 at 9:54 am EGMT+5
Fabulous. Loved every one, I too, could not imagine colors in the 40’s, but this has shed a whole new light on the era for me. Thanks!
March 15th, 2009 at 11:02 am EGMT+5
wow this is great. I can’t believe some of the light in these old photos. So interesting.
March 15th, 2009 at 12:03 pm EGMT+5
not any fat people. americans have really gotten soft.
March 15th, 2009 at 1:23 pm EGMT+5
these all kind of give me that “film noir” feel … amazing stuff. stumbled through here and thought they were shopped at first, but read the comments from people who know way more than i do, and learned a thing a two. great post! thanks!!
March 15th, 2009 at 1:51 pm EGMT+5
Negro! I was going to write it about 50 times, but someone beat me to it.
Negro, the term used to refer to “African Americans” at the time the photo was taken.
Negro! The Spanish word meaning “black”.
Reminds one of George Orwell’s novel, “1984″, in which people continually edit historical text to comply with current beliefs and usage. Orwell predicted the loss of freedom of speech at the hands of the conservative right. Isn’t it ironic that the greatest threat to freedom of speech we have ever encountered in out nation is due to the “Politically Correct” agenda of the liberal element. (Any liberals offended by the term “element”? TS) The only good thing about political correctness is that it enriches the language as the liberal element continually attempts to come up with language that will offend absolutely none of the millions of people who live in our country.
When I was the age of the “youths” in the photo, I was called a boy, even though I’m not an African-American. The offense is in the context! The use of the word “element” in conjunction with the term “liberal”, was meant to be offensive!
Finally and most importantly, the photos are awesome. Anyone know the make and model of any of the cameras used?
March 15th, 2009 at 2:33 pm EGMT+5
Amazing photos, beautiful. I adore the colorfull and vibrant feeling…
March 15th, 2009 at 7:05 pm EGMT+5
What fascinates me is the use of lighting in the photos, especially the shots of individuals at work. The photographer is shooting from a black and white mind frameset, I think. Especially in the “Crane Operator” shot. The lighting hits the rim of his cap, which bleaches out the face just a little. The graphical elements in the background would be perfect as black and white forms, but with the color, they almost distract from the man’s face. I think my favorite photo is “James Lynch,” but I also like the crowds leaving. I linke Lynch because the color highlights his realism, and the smirk and thoughtfulness captured in his eyes are intriguing. The crowd leaving shot, well, I’m just jealous, because I need to take shots like that for work, and they never come out as compelling.
March 15th, 2009 at 7:58 pm EGMT+5
Interesting comments. I grew up on an old farm with no running water, no electricity, the works, I worked hard with my dad etching a living out of a few acres of sandy soil while mom and my sisters kept the house and prepared our meals, washed our cloths with an old matag wringer washer run by a small matag gas engine with a flex pipe that mom put out the screen door of our entry. These photo’s bring back those days, and you know those folks back then would have laughed you who tut tut their words and ways because most of you have never put in an REAL hard days work like we did back then and the folks in these photo’s did.
Shame on you all, these were real people putting in a real days work in a world where winning was the object, and work was real, the pay was small and you worked to put food on the table not to buy the latest mp3 player or the next Xbox so you could play games. while you sit back and sip your drinks, puff your joint and say what a good person you are because you elected a black man and would never say negro!
March 15th, 2009 at 8:18 pm EGMT+5
HOEING AND CHOPPING COTTON ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. CHOPPING IS A TERM USES IN THE THINNING OF THE PLANTS. HOEING IS TO REMOVE THE WEEDS.
March 16th, 2009 at 1:46 am EGMT+5
I would love to share some of our pictures. These are awesome!
March 16th, 2009 at 3:16 am EGMT+5
Thank you Mr. Lang for removing his comment.
March 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am EGMT+5
Jack Delano done an excellent work in Puerto Rico check out there are some good books about his photos. Great blog! Thanks for posting this… what can I say… a digital pic will never do that… light here is like a magic aura, like dreaming.
March 16th, 2009 at 10:32 am EGMT+5
wow… its great!!!
March 16th, 2009 at 12:05 pm EGMT+5
shopped shopped shopped shopped!!!!!!
March 16th, 2009 at 2:26 pm EGMT+5
SHOOPED!
March 16th, 2009 at 6:19 pm EGMT+5
Thanks for posting and thanks to Mr. Peter Bacon Hales for authenticating. What crazy comments! I think we should start making people prove they are at least 13 to post. LOL!
March 16th, 2009 at 7:12 pm EGMT+5
Legal demais! Essas fotos são raras mesmo e de grande qualidade! Interessante também pois elas tem mais de 60 anos, mas parecem ser mais novas pela cor!
March 16th, 2009 at 7:51 pm EGMT+5
That is impressive, to say the least.
March 16th, 2009 at 10:49 pm EGMT+5
Why does everything have to be about race, people? Seriously.
March 16th, 2009 at 11:52 pm EGMT+5
http://orz.4chan.org/wg/src/1237260726443.jpg
thats authentic!
March 17th, 2009 at 12:00 am EGMT+5
WOWOWOW
March 17th, 2009 at 12:27 am EGMT+5
Muito boas as fotos
I konw a little english, so sorry
well, so, very good your photos
March 17th, 2009 at 8:18 am EGMT+5
these are around my parents and grandparents time . amazing to think of their lives then . but did anyone notice the segregation of the workers in the lines leaving the shipyards after work , sometimes you do not need a word to see injustice .
March 17th, 2009 at 11:14 am EGMT+5
This pictures are awsome!
Thanx for sharing.
March 17th, 2009 at 11:20 am EGMT+5
“Woman” machinist? The adjective you’re after is “female.” You wouldn’t say “man” carpenter, would you? You really don’t need the adjective anyway; “machinist” will do. But the photos are lovely – thank you for sharing.
March 17th, 2009 at 11:43 am EGMT+5
All lovely photos capturing the era !!!
I don’t know if all of the photos were taken in color or not but I do know that kodachrome existed then and in viewing personal family photos of that era it’s amazing how well the color has held up on them …
Everyone has their own opinion about the word ‘Negro’ but it is not a dirty word unless you make it one and it fits in the context of the photos of that era … I am saddened the word was dropped from the original title on this site because that’s the same as trying to rewrite history (any history) to fit the fancy’s of today … I am of mixed race and Negro, Black and African American each have their proper place in time and the evolution of our country and each used in my lifetime as standard ethnic titles …
March 17th, 2009 at 3:04 pm EGMT+5
My ears are burning…
March 17th, 2009 at 5:15 pm EGMT+5
Those were the days; we thought they’d never end. Thank Heaven they did. But we are headed right back to the same thing. Thank Heaven I’m 86 and won’t have to live thru another Great Depression.
March 17th, 2009 at 7:16 pm EGMT+5
i agree they are nice pics,but…… did anybody else notice how clean the people supposedly hoeing the field hats were?ive worked outside for years and every hat i ever wore became sweat staind very quickly.and i sure wouldnt were my new hat just to work in the field.And the metal lathe that the woman is working at seems to be brand new and her clothes are not staind from oil.everybody just seems so clean and were there is dirt just seems staged. i dont know but thats what struck me.
March 17th, 2009 at 8:53 pm EGMT+5
What a damn shame…
Such gorgeous, thought provoking, emotion stirring pictures – thank you for posting them
I particularly liked NEGRO boy near Cincinatti, Ohio (yes, that is it’s TITLE, so I will use it correctly – it’s not an insulting word in any way, shape, or form – ignoramuses!) – he looks so serious and puffed up with his impotance as he poses for the picture that it makes me smile :)
(And for your reference, no I’m not “white” or “caucasian”!)
Also, WOMAN Machinist (yes, that is it’s TITLE, so I will use it correctly. TODAY Jane, it may be incorrect, but back then it was perfectly normal – deal with it) reminded me that in an era where women were used to keeping home, they went out to work long hard hours to support their families, homes, and country
Jane, if you’re all about feminism and equality, you’ll do well to stop and realise that this period did alot to bring about equality, as it was seen that women COULD do jobs that traditionally had only been done by men
Stop being so ridiculously PC and just step back in time and let the era these photos were taken in envelope you, bring you closer to your families, and help you FEEL your history
March 18th, 2009 at 5:22 am EGMT+5
Wow, you guys certainly know how to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
The original title of any piece of art should always be kept. Daryl’s reasons were obviously valid judging by the inane chatter above.
They are obviously staged pictures, but not photoshopped.
Nice to see you guys were still having “country fairs” in 1942 when the rest of the world was at war.
sir winston churchill (1874-1965)
“We shall go on till the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island what ever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches and we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We will never surrender”.
(Extract from speech delivered on 13th May 1940)
thanks for popping by
sorry, you guys are so self adsorbed, I couldn’t resist.
The conversation should be about the photos
Got rid of the “negro” conversation though.
Cheers
March 18th, 2009 at 5:34 am EGMT+5
These photos are a real gem! Love them!
March 18th, 2009 at 5:48 pm EGMT+5
Kodachrome
Was sold in 35mm cartridges and paperbacked 828 rolls- same width, no perfs
It was sold in sheet film sizes up to 8×10
There was no “ASA” in 1940- but there were several “film Speeds” by Weston {meters], Kodak, and GE, to name a few: Close but not the same.. Kodachrome was usually shot at what was about EI 10, and the “jump” to 25 speed didn’t occur until around 1950+
March 19th, 2009 at 12:09 am EGMT+5
To all of the above,
Read my original posting. I have explained there how these photos MOST likely were taken. 95% certain of my explanations and it could be verified by any other photography expert.To all, these were not NOT COLORIZED (the process was not a common practice, only for home portraiture-some of you may remember) and shot in Kodachrome 25 ISO using a Graflex 4×5 or medium format chrome sheet. NOT roll. It is obvious! See the markings in the photos. Also, documentary and newspaper photographers from that era, did not used 35mm those days. Graflex, Graflex, my green learners, was the workhorse of the era.
It is shame that the people reading PDN online has not any photography education at all. The barrage of unnecessary comments are demeaning to the working photographers who took these little masterpieces. It is all about PHOTO JOURNALISM. To tell an whole story from your POV. No captions needed. The captions are added by pencil pushers and photos editors to classify the photos under categories. WE, the real working photographers do not dwell in photo names, just in photo messages. To tell an story as beautiful or as ugly as it can be.
The digital era and its instant gratification has contributed to the ignorance and detriment
of the aforementioned statements – photoshop color correction or the social political “correctness” of today did not existed when any of these photographers clicked the mechanical shutters of their Graflex cameras using Kodachrome 25 ISO (color slide) to
convey what they believed it was a subject that would tell an history…
George Leon, Cinematographer
March 19th, 2009 at 5:49 pm EGMT+5
The little shine boy in Vachon’s photo looks like Stymie from the little Rascals.
March 19th, 2009 at 5:54 pm EGMT+5
Vachon’s photo of the little colored boy looks like Stymie of the”Little Rascals”.
March 19th, 2009 at 6:01 pm EGMT+5
Is it just me or does the Carpenter at work on Douglas Dam, Tennessee pic look a bit too modern…
March 19th, 2009 at 10:54 pm EGMT+5
My husband & I were in Pie Town, New Mexico in 2005. Resturant and Post Office was about all that was still open at that time. Lots of the old buildings boarded up.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:20 am EGMT+5
It is interesting to see how dubious some viewers are — The implication of several comments is that if these shots are “staged,” they cannot be authentic to the 1930s or 1940s. Yet “reportage,” the documentary form which permeated US culture in the Depression, was very much a style. In fact, this was a time when the social sciences and the arts shared common techniques, subjects, and even practitioners. For example, in terms of camerawork, it is possible to compare the FSA photos to the documentary techniques in Citizen Kane (1941) — the seemingly objective “eye witness” account, the low-angled shots, the high contrast lighting. Of course, the photographers were also telling a story, and viewers can point to the values which shaped their photographs.
Perhaps (?) Citizen Kane is important in part because it was an early example of the jaded gaze of some of the viewers here. (The storyline is literally about the king of yellow journalism on his deathbed; the film is partly ABOUT the documentary style, making a subject of the lens.)
March 20th, 2009 at 3:40 am EGMT+5
Apologies for taking the focus off these beautiful photographs. Just trying to make some sense of the reaction to them here.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:42 am EGMT+5
It has been said that a picture is worth a 1000 words… however, all of the photo’s say much more than that! :D I would love to see more! Thanks so much for sharing them.
March 20th, 2009 at 9:27 am EGMT+5
Great pictures! So many sceptics in this world. Come on people, just enjoy them for what they are, really great pictures from our past.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:00 pm EGMT+5
Look again at the photos. You take away the feeling that the photographers respected their subjects. They didn’t seek out freaks or caricatures of the “unfashionable” classes of society. Maybe it took a commission and a paycheck from the government to get them to that point – but it’s no less honest than creating grotesque images to mock your fellow man (or “person”, Bella).
And to ‘Big Brit’ – I wish we’d stayed at our country fairs ;-)
March 20th, 2009 at 3:23 pm EGMT+5
Very nice, beautiful and interesting photos. I work as a photographer and i can see that many of the photographs are staged, but that doesn’t mean that they are unfaithfull or false. Sometimes you have to stage photos for the camera because the camera is a very blunt instrument. The important thing is that the photographers from the beginning found the situation real and significant.
Sorry for my bad english, I’m from Sweden! :-)
March 20th, 2009 at 11:48 pm EGMT+5
It’s a shame that people will try to turn anything into something negative. These pictures are historical and amazing.
I’m pretty sure the US was helping you with that whole war effort thing too…Oh, look, there’s a picture to prove it!
March 20th, 2009 at 11:56 pm EGMT+5
My mother was born in 1933 and I have some of her clothes which my grandmother made out of feed sacks and flour sacks. The prints in the photo of the family with 5 kids show the same fabric print; they used everything they had. My mom never had a store bought dress until she was in high school in 1950.
My dad was an amateur photographer and we have many pictures in both black and white and color from the 40’s on…. they are beautiful, crisp and clear like these. Some are obviously staged – of course! If someone from the government came to take your picture, wouldn’t you set yourself up to look nice?? Or wouldn’t the photographer do that to tell the story he or she wanted to tell? Of course.
I can’t believe how naive some of you young’ins are. There’s no shame in that, as long as you don’t pretend to know it all; and you actually open up your mind to things you haven’t thought of before!!!
March 21st, 2009 at 12:06 am EGMT+5
Stunning photographs! I know nothing about photography, the only camera I own is part of my cell phone and I rarely use it. I don’t give a damn about what is real or ’shopped or wtf-ever. Even if they were staged, they would still be awesome.
And fyi, the term “African American” was created by “white crackers” to replace Negro because, darn it, Negro was just to close to that other “N” word for them to feel comfortable using it. As one poster said, it’s all about the context and in this case, the era. Negro WAS the proper and polite term when I was growing up. Black isn’t correct, either, just as white is not correct for Caucasians, but it sounds kinda stupid to say sorta black or sorta white, now, doesn’t it? Even an albino is not exactly white, so argue about, oh, say, the financial crisis instead. Hell, even THAT has shades of gray since each “side” blames the other.
All colors are beautiful, so be authentically color blind and just enjoy the nuances of every color God gave us…
March 21st, 2009 at 1:30 pm EGMT+5
Big Brit – shutup. Are you saying Britons never took time to enjoy what they could during the war? Are you really that dumb?
A englishman calling others self-absorbed. That’s comedy gold right there.
March 21st, 2009 at 2:07 pm EGMT+5
Hey, these are really cool photos! Thanks for sharing. :D ~~~ yours in Chaos, Scarlett
March 21st, 2009 at 2:21 pm EGMT+5
I owned a transparency retouching studio in NYC for over 40 years. We colaborated with Eastman Kodak when they were formulating their E-6 Ekatchrome emulsion.
I believe the color photographs, if they are indeed Kodachrome. had to have been manipilated in some fashion, my guess is photoshop.
Kodachrome was strictly an amature film, it was very difficult for printers, particularly if there were flesh tones involved, to crate good reproductions in print. Kodachrome has larger than life colors, many of them super saturated especially in the reds. These images do not show any of the typical color ranges and contrast that are inherent in Kodachrome. In fact I was frequently asked by printers/engravers during the 50’s era, to creat a duplicate on ektachrome film so it cold be reproduced more faithfully.
These problems can be overcome easily in Photoshop. The harsher, in your face color and contrast of Kodachrome, so beloved by amatures can be made much more realistic and contemorary by using any number of digital imaging programs.
The photoshop “expert” who, in an earlier comment claims that you cannot color a black and white image convincingly with that program, seems to be unaware that it can be done extremely convincingly. Apparently he/she has never seen some of the work converting black and white to color on Worth1000.com
Link to images: http://www.worth1000.com/galleries.asp?rel=Pleasantville&display=photoshop&id=22318
March 22nd, 2009 at 12:42 am EGMT+5
WOW! talk about some great photo restoration! this is amazing! If all are photos could be toucjed up like this then history wouldn’t look so ‘old’
March 22nd, 2009 at 2:43 am EGMT+5
What a great find. Probably some of the most striking photography from that era and still as awe inspiring today. Thank you for posting. Absolutely gorgeous.
March 22nd, 2009 at 4:24 am EGMT+5
The last one made me think of a band photo.
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:15 am EGMT+5
There is a tink I don’t understand….Why people kept on using B&W if they could use “Kodachrome” and get this faboulous pics?
March 22nd, 2009 at 1:21 pm EGMT+5
dont get me wrong these look great an all, but a lot of them look posed. the one with sharecroppers looks way too crisp.
March 22nd, 2009 at 2:42 pm EGMT+5
@all the people knocking on the “rarity” of these photographs — Just because they are in the LoC and on the internet doesn’t mean they’re not rare… just more accessible. The fact remains that compared to the more popular and available media at the time, color photographs were not frequently taken. There are fewer of them, in fact far fewer, than there are b&w photos. This makes them rare.
@all the people who think “negro” is still offensive, including the person who thought it necessary to remove it from the title of the photograph on this site — Grow up. It’s just a word. If you personally put a hateful or racist meaning behind it that comes from yourself, rather than the historical and nostalgic context the word typically inhabits, then you have bigger problems than a word.
If I saw photographs of white people taken by another race titled “Those peculiar ghosty-faces” I’d laugh my ass off. Negro is another word for black. We don’t call them Negroes anymore because everyone uses the word “black” now for that color. So now we call them “Blacks,” depending on who is listening. They call themselves Blacks too, depending on who is listening.
The only reason racism still exists is because we let it — by getting up in arms over an antiquated word and condemning people for things that we ourselves are guilty for. It will be some time before people really coexist together in the essence of true harmony. But in the meantime we can admit that we’re all human, we all hate everyone else for stupid reasons, and just get on with our lives and try not to be such jerks.
March 22nd, 2009 at 2:54 pm EGMT+5
Back on track though…
Thanks for this terrific collection of pictures. I don’t typically browse the LoC myself, so I really appreciate that you’ve extracted these gems for us all to see. They definitely help such a bygone era seem more real. The picture of the “camouflage class” especially did this for me, because you can see with such exquisite detail the hair, makeup, clothes, and other accessories that defined that time. It makes our own fashion seem so transient.
The photo of the roundhouse worker was definitely my favorite. You can read a novel in the twinkle in his eye and lines on his face.
March 23rd, 2009 at 3:08 am EGMT+5
Thanks for uploading these American treasures. As for the validity of colour images vs. black & white, in a sense it’s all semantics due to the fact that ALL colour images are nothing more than “an optical illusion” just as motion pictures, television, and movies are. Movies are actually “still photographs” moving at around 24 frames per second which thus produce the illusion of movement or “life”. All colour paper used for prints, and all colour films are actually layers of cyan, magenta, and yellow pigments, which reflect “filtered” light which allows our human eyes and brain to “remix” the sandwiched layers allowing us to “see colour”…. Perhaps you’ve seen how “white light” after passing through a prism, breaks up or separates the actual colours in the aforementioned “white light”.
But technically speaking these ARE genuine colour photos created with the wonderful Kodachrome slide films. I’m sure many of you have seen the wonderful huge colour murals KODAK used to exhibit at say Grand Central Station in Manhattan, NYC. Those for the most part were created with 35MM Kodachrome slides! I’ve worked in several photo labs there, and I used to print murals. Due to the fact that Kodachrome is the BEST colour film ever produced in terms of resolution or sharpness and colour saturation, it easily allows 8X10 inter-negatives to be created, then later projected and enlarged say onto Duratrans Material (Kodak) which is transluscent and back-lit upon display. So yes, a 35mm camera using Kodachrome film can potentially give BETTER image quality than say a 120 format film which is physically larger. The only downside with using Kodachrome was that Kodak was the only lab that could process this high quality film, which also entailed complex equipment and chemicals. (later other labs like Dugal in NYC also purchased equipment and training to process this much loved film.) As for the “surreal colour palette of Kodachrome….. that was one of it’s appeals to artists such as Mr. Pete Turner who used it to great effect using slide duping techniques, and filters, used on many classic Jazz album covers from the late 60’s and 70’s on now classic A&M/CTI Creed Taylor gate-fold album covers, of artists such as Wes Montgomery, Antonio C. Jobim, Herbie Mann, Stanley Turrentine, George Benson, Freddie Hubbard, Tamba 4, etc.
As for the political comments, I find it amusing how so many here believe these real and authentic scenes of hard working Americans are FAKE, yet they still have not realized how THEY have been bamboozled by the so called “First African-American President”! I thought his name was Bill Clinton??? What do I know? I don’t believe a word from ANY Democrat, as they are now punishing America’s achievers, and giving their hard earned fruits to those demanding more and more “hand outs”…. To me Obama is NOT working for America, nor for Americans. He is undermining and weakening this Nation at Warp Speed. Every dictator has praised him, and he is about to cripple the military machine Great Americans pictured here built. While Obama is appeasing Jihadists, and Socialists, THEY are claiming and drilling for Oil, and stream-lining THEIR military machines….
To the Obamabots…. Reality Shows are …..well “reality”! TV has sold you a “Trojan Horse President”…. Many Dems are ALREADY having “Buyers Remorse”…
March 23rd, 2009 at 6:34 am EGMT+5
nice . pictures . i like most of them.
March 23rd, 2009 at 12:28 pm EGMT+5
Great work… One comment though… Referring to the first picture… Wasn’t Coke green back then?
March 23rd, 2009 at 6:17 pm EGMT+5
Wow! Amazing! It’s always pleasant to see pictures like these! As part of American History they can make us go back in time with their vivid colors and Textures! Thanks
March 25th, 2009 at 11:43 am EGMT+5
MOAR! lolz
March 25th, 2009 at 7:41 pm EGMT+5
There are some simply wonderful photographs here. Thank you so much for sharing them. I’m sorry for some of the ridiculous comments you (and I) have had to wade through while sharing these pictures. The photograph “Carpenter at work on Douglas Dam, Tennessee, a Tennessee Valley Authority project, 1942″ is really amazing. Very stylized.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:08 pm EGMT+5
The carpenter shot does look like a studio shot to people alive today because we are used to seeing shots which use huge softboxes.
However, it is simply a shot taken outside with the use of two large white reflector panels on either side of the photographer, to fill what would have been horribly dark shadows.
Look at the original version of the shot on the Tennessee Valley Authority entry on Wikipedia – it’s nice and big, and you can see the highlights of the two reflectors on the drill’s chuck, between the two knurled sections. These two highlights are also visible on the left hand side of the saw handle (bottom-right of pic).
Look again at all of the photos by Alfred T. Palmer – they all employ artificial light (or natural light light that is reflected by artificial means).
April 13th, 2009 at 10:34 pm EGMT+5
Ah, too much drama about these photos!! :) Why can’t we simply enjoy these historic photographs for what they are? Thanks for putting this wonderful collection together, I really enjoyed viewing the history these images captured.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:52 pm EGMT+5
It’s amazing to think that the majority of the people in these pictures are elderly or dead by now. They just look so alive and vibrant. It’s quite sad.
April 16th, 2009 at 4:57 pm EGMT+5
BOY THESE PICTURES REALLY TAKE ME BACK TO THE 40′S,SOME LOOK LIKE MY NEIGHBORS
April 19th, 2009 at 11:38 pm EGMT+5
Great photos. Being a fan of history, and as a part-time collector of historic photos myself, I enjoyed seeing these.
Equally amusing is the uproar over the term ‘negro’. Well, Negro beat me to it which his/her oft-repeated use of the word. The term is accurate for both the time period in which is was used and the race of the person protrayed (now and then). It’s interesting, as someone else also mentioned in relation to Orwell’s 1984, how people (revisionists, perhaps?) modify terminology to reflect current societal beliefs and preferences. History and historical context are lost when that happens.
Also interesting is the debate regarding colorization/photoshopping and comments about “modern” and “strobist” lighting. As if photographers in the 1930s and 1940s didn’t know what they were doing, didn’t understand light and lighting, nor had the equipment to pull it off. Where do you think “modern” lighting techniques came from? It wasn’t from a now popular ex-photojournalist. More and more “photographers” today have zero experience with film nor do they know or understand the (or any) history of photography. So, it’s understandable there might be some folks thinking no way could there be color photography or off-camera flash way back in the Stone Age when all photographers were named Jimmy Olson.
Thank you to Peter Bacon Hales for his explanation and historical references from the FSA. That was definitely an interesting time period for America and photography. Several photographers gained their fame during that period, some of them getting the job simply because there wasn’t other work available and finding they had a real aptitude for it.
April 20th, 2009 at 6:11 am EGMT+5
I agree with Mike. We don’t need a history lesson. Beautiful images in any case.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:26 pm EGMT+5
great photos. they look like as if they are captured from a movie.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:39 am EGMT+5
It has been interesting reading all the comments concerning these wonderful old photos. I was born in Los Angeles in 1932 and they don’t look the least suspecious to me. My mother worked during the war as an Inspector in a “war plant”. I went there regularly to collect money for the “war effort” as all school children did and have seen lots of “women machinists”. Nothing in any of the photos looks in any way fake to me. Of course they were arranged. All fotos were more or less – most still are. You do it yourself when you take pictures on family occasions. If you want to see more color photos from the 40-ties check out http://images.google.com/hosted/life. We bought and read Life Magazine back then and were not the least surprised to see color on its pages. As a photographer perhaps I could point out that the pixels some commentators saw as proof of Photoshopping are the result av the inscanning and publishing process. As for the unnecessary discussion of the word negro I can at least point out that that was the most respectful word available at the time.
May 3rd, 2009 at 9:13 pm EGMT+5
Does anyone out there know anyone out there that belongs to these faces?? This is magic.
May 16th, 2009 at 5:07 pm EGMT+5
The images are fantastic, no matter what has been done to them. my grandmother was born in 1903. She had many photo’s taken back in the 30’s & 40’s and yes some were color photo’s. Still in excellent shape with very true color to date the main reason is that they have been very well maintained and by this I mean they were kept in a box and each had their own sun proof sleeve. To help prevent damage or fading.
All I can say for those that doubt is, just because you have never seen or experienced something does not make it false or fake or shopped, get some life experience before you open your maouth’s
May 16th, 2009 at 5:08 pm EGMT+5
Yes, I misspelled mouth’s. lol
May 17th, 2009 at 5:09 am EGMT+5
beautiful fotos…. i love the first :)
greetings from greece
May 19th, 2009 at 12:25 pm EGMT+5
Thank you so mcuh for these beautiful and moving photos.
May 19th, 2009 at 4:21 pm EGMT+5
photoshopped!
June 18th, 2009 at 4:18 am EGMT+5
everett , are you blind ? Jesus christ , kids these days. Look at some comments above to understand what’s about these photos.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:08 pm EGMT+5
Seeing these classic FSA photos makes me realize that nothing we are doing in photography today hasn’t been tried before. The toys we have to play with have become high tech (and much more expensive) but the results are not that much different. Edgy lighting, street photography its all here. Thanks for sharing these great examples from these artists from the 40’s.
June 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 pm EGMT+5
These are great. thanks for sharing….
July 6th, 2009 at 2:16 am EGMT+5
Wonderful, wonderful photos.
Unfortunately, most of the comments on the page are ridiculous.
My favorite is photo number 2, the clouds are amazing.
July 9th, 2009 at 6:29 pm EGMT+5
This is obviously faked. You can tell by too much detail in the shots (film wouldn’t be THAT detailed), obvious photoshop techniques such as blurring the background, no lens flaws, perfect exposure, far too broad of a color spectrum, studio lighting… the list goes on and on that this entire set was digital start to finish.
What are you trying to prove with your fakes?
July 29th, 2009 at 12:12 am EGMT+5
Wow! what a great experience to see these photo’s.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like this before.
August 19th, 2009 at 10:36 am EGMT+5
The focus and colour on a lot of these photos are just astounding!
Thank you for sharing them.
August 28th, 2009 at 3:31 pm EGMT+5
I just love this generation! My husband and I just watched The Great Raid, which took place in the 40’s, recapturing my interest in their lives. Very special to see the pictures.
August 29th, 2009 at 2:09 pm EGMT+5
I’m so used to seeing people from the 40’s in black and white that I don’t believe it when the people of the 40’s in a color photograph look exactly like the we do today – I know that sounds dumb…but I kept looking at the photographs to see how/if they were staged.
I see the black and white photos of my grandpa and grandma and I wonder what they would’ve looked like in color since I only started seeing them in color when they were older. Do you get it? Do you dig it?!
Just flabbergasted by the photos – great photography and lighting and color.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:24 am EGMT+5
when i was a kid (in the 70s) i used to think that years ago the world was black and white – well, you only had to see the old films to work that out(!)
great pictures and great colours as well.
i love the one of the little black kid the best…. closely followed by the buffet table one!
great to see these pix in colour.
August 31st, 2009 at 12:38 pm EGMT+5
Poor Evan – “This is obviously faked.”
You’ve obviously never seen a real photographer work with real film. Kodachrome has very fine resolution:
http://www.epinions.com/review/Kodak_Kodachrome__200___200_ASA__857_6126_/content_456720354948
Kodachrome
“Kodachrome 64’s resolution, limited more by its granularity (standard 0.048 mm aperture RMS granularity 10) than by emulsion thickness, is said to be comparable to that of a 24 megapixel digital camera, and Kodachrome 25 was comparable to a 30-35 megapixel digital sensor; these two films allowed enlargements from 35mm slides in sizes ordinarily accessible only to medium-format photographers.”
You could easily print a 16×20 from a 35mm slide.
“… blurring the background …” That’s called “depth of field. Any film photographer knows how to do it.
“… no lens flaws, …” They didn’t send their photographers out with Brownie box cameras. They had good lenses, even back then.
“… perfect exposure, …” They used an ancient device called a light meter. If they had to, they bracketed exposures.
“… far too broad of a color spectrum, …” That’s Kodachrome for you. A lot of people held wakes when Kodak stopped making it. Maybe there are a few rolls in somebody’s freezer – they’ll go for serious money if they ever decide to sell them.
“… studio lighting …” Not studio lighting. It’s called using reflectors. Look at “Carpenter at work”. The Sun’s highlight is on his helmet; there’s clearly a reflector to our left. “Crane operator” is the most obvious: there’s a reflector in front of the cab – he’s looking into it. But look at the way the photographer controlled the light:
his face is the highlight, everything behind fades into dark.
Se7sco: “Wasn’t Coke green back then?” No – if you look just right, you can see the date on the calendar on the wall.
“roundhouse worker”: That’s a typical portrait shot of the era. I’d be surprised if that one did not make it into Life. If you study that one closely, you can see where the photographer put his lights (plural). And he didn’t just walk up and shoot. He most likely spent a half hour with the subject, talking to him, establishing a connection. How are we, the viewers, supposed to make contact with that worker if the photographer didn’t?
jared: “i didnt know there were color photographs in the 1940’s”
There are color photos from the late 1800s. They were taken in Russia – I think with a 3 filter system. Two points to anyone who can find them (not that hard).
eli: “…so sharp that they look as if they could be modern recreations of old photos.”
Leitz was making super sharp optics from the early 40s at least. And Leica made super cameras at least since then. If you have a good lens, and a camera that’ll let you control f/stop and shutter speed, and you know how to use lighting, you can do every bit as good. The other half of the story is connecting with the subject.
If you can find an old bookstore (if there are any left now that Borders, Barnes & Noble &c have driven them all out), try to find Life magazine from the 30s and 40s. Especially 1940 – 1946, when they covered WW II.
They used to do a thing called a “photo essay”: A photographer went out for a few weeks or so and covered one story, then brought back a zillion rolls of film, and somebody turned it into a 10-page spread – a slice of life.
September 2nd, 2009 at 7:33 pm EGMT+5
Interesting to note the line on the left of the photo by John Vachon “Workers leaving Pennsylvania shipyards” – segregation captured in this shot?
September 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm EGMT+5
I was born in 1925 and have been making photographs since 1945. I remember when Kodachrome came out around 1935 and the principal where I went to school made pictures using it on an early 35 mm camera. Give the FSA/IWO photographers credit and shut up about Photoshop and about the title of the picture of the kid in Cincinnati. That only makes you a racist whether you know it or not.
For the past few years I have only captured images with digital cameras, easy to do, and easy to carry, acceptable images, and for all the claims by ink and paper manufacturers, we have no real idea what kind of archival quality they have, and we won’t know for at least another fity years. For a collection of vintage images, all B&W, you might want a copy of “Fading Textures, Wintage Architecture, Industry, and Transportation in Northeast Louisiana.” 377 photographs showing life as it appeared across the south during the late 19th to middle of the 20th century. About half of the properties pictured are gone forever. This is not another picture book about the ante bellum south or the great river road.
October 19th, 2009 at 7:44 am EGMT+5
Fantastic pictures, but very disappointing to read some of the ignorant comments above. They remind me of the absurd “fake moon landings” arguments.
Mike
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:21 pm EGMT+5
Shopped. . . .
October 24th, 2009 at 10:39 am EGMT+5
I have never seen such great pictures before. These are truly “one of a kind”.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:05 pm EGMT+5
im gonna call bullsh** i mean i dont believe color photos were this clear in 1940, also the level of detail on some of these seems a bit to high for 1940ish technology. but i could be wrong.
November 6th, 2009 at 4:30 am EGMT+5
nice photos of human interest with commercial value sans the forties post great depression
November 6th, 2009 at 9:15 pm EGMT+5
The skill displayed here, the sheer understanding of light and dark balance, exposure and composition is stunning. My photography teacher and mentor took away my Nikon F and sent me out with his Speed Graphic until I could light and compose BEFORE exposing those 4×5 negs. He would say, “If you’re conveying reality, it should look like life, not only like your impression of life. That’s documentary.” Yup. And the work above is priceless not only in terms of its demonstration of the photographer’s skill but also because it preserves a real, color slice of time, which resonates very strongly with me. Thanks so much for showing these images here.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:07 pm EGMT+5
These are the nicest photo’s I’ve seen in awhile. Everyone else is just jealous!
November 24th, 2009 at 6:10 pm EGMT+5
These are the nicest photo’s I’ve seen in awhile. Everyone else is just jealous!
November 24th, 2009 at 9:29 pm EGMT+5
Good Stuff!
November 24th, 2009 at 9:34 pm EGMT+5
Very Nice!
November 24th, 2009 at 9:34 pm EGMT+5
Nice!
December 24th, 2009 at 9:19 pm EGMT+5
Thanks, Daryl Lang for this post!
Thanks, John Mason, for this comment!
“Great. Thanks. It’s worth mentioning that many of these photos–John Vachon’s “Negro Boy Near Cincinnati,” for instance–are available freely from the Library of Congress FSA/OWI website as high-resolution tiff files. (After all, the people of the United States of America own the copyright.) I speak from experience when I say that they Photoshop and print well. Here’s a link to Vachon’s photo and the downloadable file: http://tinyurl.com/VachonFSAPhoto ”
Merry Christmas, Deborah
December 30th, 2009 at 6:12 am EGMT+5
nice photos
January 7th, 2010 at 11:16 am EGMT+5
Simply stunning artwork. This is genuine photojournalism. There is nothing that can truly recreate the color palate of Kodak film with a graflex camera. These are the images that tryly inspire me. No photoshop. No complex lighting set ups. Just one camera and one light with excellent results. Thanks for sharing these inspirational images!
Curtis
Wedding Photographers Miami
January 11th, 2010 at 10:07 am EGMT+5
the photos were great!!!!
January 12th, 2010 at 2:47 am EGMT+5
This shows the power of art, photography, and great design. Touches your soul, your heart, brings a flood of emotions, and inspires us all.
January 26th, 2010 at 4:08 am EGMT+5
damn peole are stupid but o well great photos anyway
February 4th, 2010 at 4:32 am EGMT+5
im not calling b/s on the pics buts its hard to see thoes Kevlar hard hats made back when aluminum hard hats was what was standard
February 4th, 2010 at 4:43 pm EGMT+5
These photos are really very interesting.