Posted on 07/07/2013 8:54:06 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Also extremely helpful, probably even more so, is the overlaying and flashing back and forth:
That is pretty cool.
After sitting through the play War Horse three times, I don’t think I can bear to look at these pictures.
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.
Incidentally, one of the first uses of 3-D photography was in pornography, and that not too long after photography was invented!
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.
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.
tnx Jeff, my html blows
Ah,sorry.
Did a title search using “Horror of the First World War revealed in amazing collection of ‘3D’”
nothing came back.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.