Crimean mystery solved!! Ping Jim

Ed · 6th November 2008, 03:46 PM

This is on-topic for broad definitions of "topic"

Look at these two photos:

Which one was taken first?

It is a fascinating story and was recounted in the NYT some time ago.

The links to the story (in order) are:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Enjoy.

Tim Simmons · 6th November 2008, 06:24 PM

Very interesting. I have tried to read it all but found my mind wandering. I think the "on" picture is the staged image judging only on the fact that it is such a tight grouping of balls ending in the near vission. That would be remarkable cannon fire in those days. I would not be suprised that no balls are on the road in the "off" picture, as the camber of the road most likely with the residual engery of the balls, make them group in the drainage gutter of the road.

Assuming they were fired from the right of the picture.

Unless the road had already been cleared. What if fired from the left, then why are so few on the road?

A hard one.

celtan · 6th November 2008, 07:19 PM

The sun was directly up in the second one. You would need to know which picture side faces east, and the time of the battle.

Myself, I think the second one is the latter. Either because there was subsequent shooting, or the balls were added. Unless they were removed to be re-shot due to lack of ammo...

hmmm...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed

This is on-topic for broad definitions of "topic"

Look at these two photos:

Which one was taken first?

It is a fascinating story and was recounted in the NYT some time ago.

The links to the story (in order) are:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Enjoy.

Ed · 6th November 2008, 08:35 PM

I should mention that these are two famous photos taken some time after the fighting.

The author is a movie director/writer with too much time on his hands. I got it into his head that figuring out which came first would be a fun thing to do.

Sort of an odd metaphor for western civilization.

celtan · 6th November 2008, 09:08 PM

Eventually got to the links.

I got a headache trying to follow his steps, at the end, I simply surrendered, and thought: Who cares? It takes too long.

Then I went to the fridge, and got me a nice piece of chocolate pie...

: )

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed

I should mention that these are two famous photos taken some time after the fighting.

The author is a movie director/writer with too much time on his hands. I got it into his head that figuring out which came first would be a fun thing to do.

Sort of an odd metaphor for western civilization.

Jim McDougall · 7th November 2008, 05:29 AM

This is completely incredible Ed! and probably one of the most fascinating adventures in not only the dynamics of photographic forensics, but historical detection on a specific event....in this case as you are aware, on of my passionate studies of the past, the Crimean War.

I recalled the image instantly, of the 'Valley of the Shadow of Death', from the books I had, especially one with much of Fenton's work in the Crimea, as one of the first war photographers. While I recall the photo, and the drama it instilled, I was not aware there were two photos, but did know of course that this photo was in some cases it seems, suggested associated in earlier times with the tragic 'Charge of the Light Brigade' which occurred over six months earlier. Clearly this was not the case with this being a roadway having nothing to do with the valley in which the famed charge took place many miles away, and so long before.

One of my favorite books has long been "After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection" (James West Davidson and Mark Hamilton Lytle, N.Y.1982) in which historical events are examined and painstakingly scrutinized in exactly this manner and detail, and it is fascinating as the authors recount these captivating investigations, often discovering important overlooked facts and revising the commonly held misconceptions.

It always struck me that this is what we do in our study of weapons, in many ways in the manner of forensics we use resources at hand to examine the weapon, compare similar examples and evidence, and try to explain and understand the reasons for unusual features or elements.

I really appreciate this posting and for not only bringing back a subject always fascinating, that immortal charge and a historically important war that began a new age of warfare and our knowledge of the face of it.

While I know that it was popular to stage compelling and dramatic battle scenes, as photography was a complicated and less than spontaneous process in those times, I think the arguments for Fenton are well placed. However, one thing that would have added additional cannon shot to the scene (these are more than those remaining in the ditch) would have been another barrage of fire, which seems incredible as the camera on tripod must have remained emplaced in the same spot for the second photo. However intrepid Fenton might have been, I cannot believe groupings of fire would have positioned that close without at least one shot ending his career, as they are all indicating perfect range in line, and in short feet from his position.

It seems logical that he might have moved cannon shot from the obscured side of the roadway to add a secondary choice for the photo he intended to use. While these balls are heavy, it doesnt seem too hard to move them around. I recall working at loading boxes of 105mm howitzer heads, about 30,000 per night!, into trucks, with similar weights, actually heavier, per box!
and I aint no Rambo!

Thanks again Ed for posting this!

All the best,
Jim

6th November 2008, 03:46 PM	#1
Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 237	Crimean mystery solved!! Ping Jim This is on-topic for broad definitions of "topic" Look at these two photos: Which one was taken first? It is a fascinating story and was recounted in the NYT some time ago. The links to the story (in order) are: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Enjoy.

6th November 2008, 06:24 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,807	Very interesting. I have tried to read it all but found my mind wandering. I think the "on" picture is the staged image judging only on the fact that it is such a tight grouping of balls ending in the near vission. That would be remarkable cannon fire in those days. I would not be suprised that no balls are on the road in the "off" picture, as the camber of the road most likely with the residual engery of the balls, make them group in the drainage gutter of the road. Assuming they were fired from the right of the picture. Unless the road had already been cleared. What if fired from the left, then why are so few on the road? A hard one.

6th November 2008, 08:35 PM	#4
Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 237	I should mention that these are two famous photos taken some time after the fighting. The author is a movie director/writer with too much time on his hands. I got it into his head that figuring out which came first would be a fun thing to do. Sort of an odd metaphor for western civilization.

7th November 2008, 05:29 AM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,945	This is completely incredible Ed! and probably one of the most fascinating adventures in not only the dynamics of photographic forensics, but historical detection on a specific event....in this case as you are aware, on of my passionate studies of the past, the Crimean War. I recalled the image instantly, of the 'Valley of the Shadow of Death', from the books I had, especially one with much of Fenton's work in the Crimea, as one of the first war photographers. While I recall the photo, and the drama it instilled, I was not aware there were two photos, but did know of course that this photo was in some cases it seems, suggested associated in earlier times with the tragic 'Charge of the Light Brigade' which occurred over six months earlier. Clearly this was not the case with this being a roadway having nothing to do with the valley in which the famed charge took place many miles away, and so long before. One of my favorite books has long been "After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection" (James West Davidson and Mark Hamilton Lytle, N.Y.1982) in which historical events are examined and painstakingly scrutinized in exactly this manner and detail, and it is fascinating as the authors recount these captivating investigations, often discovering important overlooked facts and revising the commonly held misconceptions. It always struck me that this is what we do in our study of weapons, in many ways in the manner of forensics we use resources at hand to examine the weapon, compare similar examples and evidence, and try to explain and understand the reasons for unusual features or elements. I really appreciate this posting and for not only bringing back a subject always fascinating, that immortal charge and a historically important war that began a new age of warfare and our knowledge of the face of it. While I know that it was popular to stage compelling and dramatic battle scenes, as photography was a complicated and less than spontaneous process in those times, I think the arguments for Fenton are well placed. However, one thing that would have added additional cannon shot to the scene (these are more than those remaining in the ditch) would have been another barrage of fire, which seems incredible as the camera on tripod must have remained emplaced in the same spot for the second photo. However intrepid Fenton might have been, I cannot believe groupings of fire would have positioned that close without at least one shot ending his career, as they are all indicating perfect range in line, and in short feet from his position. It seems logical that he might have moved cannon shot from the obscured side of the roadway to add a secondary choice for the photo he intended to use. While these balls are heavy, it doesnt seem too hard to move them around. I recall working at loading boxes of 105mm howitzer heads, about 30,000 per night!, into trucks, with similar weights, actually heavier, per box! and I aint no Rambo! Thanks again Ed for posting this! All the best, Jim