Horror of the First World War revealed in amazing collection of '3D'...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk ^ | July 06 2013 | By JAMES DANIEL

[Para-Ord.45]

Horror of the First World War revealed in amazing collection of '3D' stereoscopic images found in an attic after decades

A Toronto photography studio has stumbled across a stereoscopic camera, and its photographic slides, that captured scenes of World War I in 3D.

The photographs were taken in the trenches, streets, and battlefields of World War I.

The striking images, acquired using a handheld stereoscopic camera called the Verascope and were captured by soldiers in the French army.

When the camera was acquired it was still in pristine condition and included the original leather carrying case and glass slides.

Each slide is a piece of history in photographic form and show scenes from the trenches, streets, and battlefields of World War I.

Visitors to A Nerd's World in Toronto can use a special 3D viewer to see the slides for themselves but with kind permission we are able to bring you the stunning images.

[Jeff Winston]

If you're skilled at viewing the "magic eye" stereograms, you can get these kind as well. It helps to sit well back from the screen and exercise some patience.

Also extremely helpful, probably even more so, is the overlaying and flashing back and forth:

[TangoLimaSierra]

That is pretty cool.

[miss marmelstein]

After sitting through the play War Horse three times, I don’t think I can bear to look at these pictures.

[max americana]

R.I.P to those souls who had to endure the horrors of trench warfare. FYI, on the pic saying Band of Brothers, I counted 5 people, not 4 as the Daily mail description says 4 friends were looking at the Verascope.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

With digital photography you could probably rig a camera not only to take the stills but to arrange them in the appropriate playback format with a speed and digital correction sufficient to eliminate most of the wobblies.

Incidentally, one of the first uses of 3-D photography was in pornography, and that not too long after photography was invented!

[W.]

When I was young, our public library had boxes of those stereoscopic 3-d images from WW1, you could check them out and take a viewer home to peruse them. Interesting reminder, ours were on cardboard rather than glass, though.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Thanks for posting. In many ways death was far less clean in WWI than WWII. It was due, in the main, to the iron casings of artillery which sent out huge mangling chunks of iron when exploded. Those chunks tore a man asunder.

[Flag_This]

"Thanks for posting. In many ways death was far less clean in WWI than WWII. It was due, in the main, to the iron casings of artillery which sent out huge mangling chunks of iron when exploded. Those chunks tore a man asunder."

Shrapnel works the same way today as it ever did. You should see what 700 ball bearings from a claymore anti-personnel mine do.

[Para-Ord.45]

tnx Jeff, my html blows

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

I was comparing WWI with WWII. Statistically speaking death was cleaner in WWII. War today is barbarized once more; our opponents will not wear uniforms identifying themselves as belligerents, use IED"s, attack civilians, behead their opponents, kill prisoners and love mangled bodies etc.

[NautiNurse]

Earlier thread with multiple photos posted here.

[Para-Ord.45]

Ah,sorry.

Did a title search using “Horror of the First World War revealed in amazing collection of ‘3D’”

nothing came back.

[RedMDer]

Please Help keep FR Independent!!

[NautiNurse]

You will find more searching success using fewer search terms. In fact, a keyword search for 3D or camera or photos would have turned up prior threads on the topic. While two or three letter search terms (e.g. 3D, WWI) do not work for thread titles, they do suffice for search keywords.

[Flag_This]

"I was comparing WWI with WWII. Statistically speaking death was cleaner in WWII."

I understand what you are trying to say, but your argument does not hold up. I contrasted your weapons of WWI with a more modern, and presumably "cleaner" weapon from the 60s. Or how about that clean killer from WWII: napalm? I'll take death by WWI shrapnel any day. War was, and always will be, utterly brutal.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Napalm was used in a limited theater-the South Pacific and in a few invasions where the Japs dug themselves in.(Tarawa, Okinawa, Iwo Jima and maybe a few others). Both sides used flame throwers in WWI.(The Germans started their use.) The statistical comparisons between WWI and WWII are real though I do not have their location at my finger tips. Wounds were studied as were deaths and comparisons were made between those factors in the two wars. Our discussion is becoming verbal i.e. the definition of “cleaner” is leading to a verbal dispute. Find and compare the statistics!

[The Antiyuppie]

I’m not so sure what the definition of “clean” is here. Mine would be flattening a one square mile area from 30,000 feet with a B-52 to the point where no two bricks are stuck together. The plane is supposed to be very uncomfortable to fly in, but...compare that to street fighting where there is an IED at every intersection, and you can only find 3/4 of them, and every 100 windows has a sniper, some with RPG’s. I’m no so sure that our present method of warfare is “clean”...at least, not for us.

The Russians has their own problems in WWII. The German civilians were outfitted with the first RPG’s. The Russians would take T-34’s through the streets, and the tank would be hit. The hold was only the size of a quarter but everyone in the tank would be dead from the hot metal, etc. They Russians would just patch up the hole and get more soldiers to put in the tank...

I have read that the projectiles used in the Civil war were incredibly evil, and that, combined with the lack of medical care, meant that most gunshot wounds to the extremities meant an amputation.

[Flag_This]

Your statement that - "In many ways death was far less clean in WWI than WWII. It was due, in the main, to the iron casings of artillery which sent out huge mangling chunks of iron when exploded." - implied that those iron casings were no longer flying around in WWII, so death was cleaner then. I responded that those same chunks of shrapnel were flying in WWII and, indeed, are still flying to this very day.

Death may have been less clean in WWI because of the lack of antibiotics, or the general state of medical technology, or the fact that they lived in mud-filled trenches for four years, but shrapnel has been a battlefield constant since exploding shells were invented in the 15th or 16th century; so I guess I don't understand your juxtaposing those terms.

I'm not trying to be deliberately contentious, or just a smart-a$$; I'm just explaining what drew my initial response to your post.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Once again check the statistics. There are numerous autopsy reports regarding the nature of the wounds received in WWI compared with WWII. Common sense indicates that when troops were massed in trenches an artillery hit expelling large chunks of iron casing would mow down and dismember many men. There are numerous reports of human entrails hanging from trees, flattened men filling the bottom of large holes. The troops were more spread out in WWII. The mass of artillery fired in WWI was far greater than WWII. If I remember the dates correctly during the month of March 1916 during the battle of Verdun the Germans fired 5000 guns, 24 hours per day, for the entire 31 days. The wounds statistically speaking were far more horrific in WWI than WWII. That is based upon actual autopsies.