https://spitalfieldslife.com/2021/12/12 ... christmas/
When I wrote one of the series of ' x through time' books, some 96 photos of then and now, what I discovered whilst trying to create the same scene now was that photographers or cameras of old did not do depth-of-field.
A blend of a century ago ago and more recently
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2054
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 4:00 pm
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Re: A blend of a century ago ago and more recently
Much more difficult to do with the frame size of the cameras and the long exposure times needed.brightncheerful wrote:https://spitalfieldslife.com/2021/12/12 ... christmas/
When I wrote one of the series of ' x through time' books, some 96 photos of then and now, what I discovered whilst trying to create the same scene now was that photographers or cameras of old did not do depth-of-field.
John
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4630
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Re: A blend of a century ago ago and more recently
Thankyou.brightncheerful wrote:https://spitalfieldslife.com/2021/12/12 ... christmas/When I wrote one of the series of ' x through time' books, some 96 photos of then and now, what I discovered whilst trying to create the same scene now was that photographers or cameras of old did not do depth-of-field.
I do love these blended photographs, albeit with a sadness for what has been lost from our streetscapes.
I had not noticed the lack of depth-of-field. One would think the opposite, given the relatively small apertures of older cameras. My first camera was a Zeiss Ikon Nettar 515/2, the max aperture was 4.5 and iirc it closed down to 64.
V8