Blown Away
January 21, 2010 5:56 PM   Subscribe

A relative of mine discovered a Brownie Camera that she said belonged to a sailor in World War II, stationed at Pearl Harbor. The camera contained a roll of film which I had her develop as she is overseas and we did not want to risk losing this potential treasure in the mail... The photos speak for themselves.
posted by patr1ck (37 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Was it over when the Germans photoshopped Pearl Harbor? Hell no! -- cortex



 
Holy fuck - and these are real?
posted by Artw at 5:59 PM on January 21, 2010


Holy shit, those are incredible pictures. The second-last one gave me chills.
posted by bewilderbeast at 5:59 PM on January 21, 2010


Wow -- it's amazing to think of these images sitting undeveloped and unknown for so long. Just... wow.
posted by tractorfeed at 6:00 PM on January 21, 2010


That's amazing! Is that for real?
posted by jwest at 6:01 PM on January 21, 2010


Not even remotely true.
posted by entropicamericana at 6:03 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Wow
posted by Abbril at 6:03 PM on January 21, 2010


Alas, this is not real. This is a collection of Pearl Harbor photos, some of them very famous, put together with a compelling story to give them new life.

I'm sorry to have to report that this is the case. It would be really cool to make a discovery like this.
posted by Dreadnought at 6:03 PM on January 21, 2010 [2 favorites]


For me this immediately fell in the category of so amazing as to be suspicious. I'd like a good explanation of why this picture is already on this page (scroll down).
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:03 PM on January 21, 2010


See?
posted by entropicamericana at 6:05 PM on January 21, 2010


This is so unbelievably fake I can't believe anyone would believe it's real. I've seen some of those photos before.
posted by barnacles at 6:05 PM on January 21, 2010


Uhhh, crap? If this is really fake, then I'm sorry. The blog is that of a local photo processing place in San Francisco, so that'd be pretty shitty of them to con their customers like that. The thought didn't even cross my mind when posting this.
posted by patr1ck at 6:06 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Hell, the last photo in the set has an inscription in the lower-right that is mostly cut off, though you can see #77. Really! That's amazing that Brownies had the ability to let their photographer open them up and do that on the film without ruining the shot.
posted by barnacles at 6:07 PM on January 21, 2010


Looks like some of these are in the Betteman collection, so I guess no, it isn't true.

First the wolves and now this. Sigh.
posted by Artw at 6:08 PM on January 21, 2010


Incredible that they had Photoshop in 1941.
posted by DU at 6:08 PM on January 21, 2010


This blog has a badly-scanned copy of one of the photos supposedly developed in 2010, and they posted it in 2007. I love time machines.
posted by barnacles at 6:09 PM on January 21, 2010


Incredible that they had Photoshop in 1941.

Apparently they did.
posted by Artw at 6:10 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Oh the huge manatee
posted by fire&wings at 6:10 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Timesplips, dude. Timeslips.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 6:10 PM on January 21, 2010


I'll just go ahead and flag one of my own posts again then. sigh.
posted by patr1ck at 6:11 PM on January 21, 2010


I'm going predict a Hiroshima sized explosion of Facebook status updates and email forwards from redneck cousins who I never hear from except when they want to forward this kind of crap to me. Sigh. Curse you photo-blogging faker.
posted by humanfont at 6:11 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Timesplips, dude. Timeslips.

heh
posted by Artw at 6:11 PM on January 21, 2010


A relative of mine

aaannnnnddd... fake! Real people have mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and uncles with names. Urban myth people have "relatives" and "friends of guys they know."
posted by drjimmy11 at 6:12 PM on January 21, 2010 [8 favorites]


Apparently they did.

Yeah, I saw that. The one on the blog has been enhanced, though. For one thing, the scribbled in section on the right has been recovered somehow. Also, there's a lot more detail in the explosion.

But that said: I've seen a lot of pixels. Even the Corbis one looks fakey to me. That explosion is too movie-like and "popped".
posted by DU at 6:13 PM on January 21, 2010


i'm 99% sure the 5th picture was in my middle school history book..i clearly remember the butt on that standing pearl harbor sailor. no way this is real.
posted by MXJ1983 at 6:15 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


i took these myself and can confirm they are real. I'm saddened to see such cynicism on mefi.
posted by sgt.serenity at 6:15 PM on January 21, 2010 [5 favorites]


Wow, they ripped off photos that were on wikipedia?

--
Incredible that they had Photoshop in 1941.

What are you talking about?
posted by delmoi at 6:15 PM on January 21, 2010


Photoshop wasn't invented until at least the moon "landing".
posted by Artw at 6:16 PM on January 21, 2010 [4 favorites]


Why would someone do something this stupid? They must be trying to make some point about something, why else use photos that were sure to be recognizied?
posted by vrakatar at 6:18 PM on January 21, 2010


I was suspicious when I noticed that the last pic' was taken with a very wide angle lens, and some of the other photos look like they were taken w/ a standard perspective lens, and some looked like they were taken with something close to telephone length.
posted by Lukenlogs at 6:20 PM on January 21, 2010


But that said: I've seen a lot of pixels. Even the Corbis one looks fakey to me. That explosion is too movie-like and "popped".

Uh, you can see a large sized copy here

As far as looking "Movie like" how do you think they make explosions for movies? Usually (up until recently) it was by actually blowing something up. I mean, how man actual non-movie large scale explosions have you seen? How about this one?
posted by delmoi at 6:20 PM on January 21, 2010


Uh, you can see a large sized copy here

Uh, I'm mocking myself.
posted by DU at 6:22 PM on January 21, 2010


TinEye search results:

1, 2, 3, etc.
posted by delmoi at 6:23 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Another thing that gives it away -- in the scan of the last picture you can see, up in the sky, the faint silhouette of typesetting on the other side of the page, indicating this image was scanned from a book or magazine. Pro tip: if you put a sheet of black construction paper behind an image that you're scanning, any text on the other side of the page won't be visible.
posted by Joey Bagels at 6:23 PM on January 21, 2010 [1 favorite]


Photo 5: Hickam Field during the attack (picture is mirrored left-right) (USAF)

Photo 9: Magazine explosion on board USS Shaw (US Naval Historical Center)

Photo 10: Left: USS Downes, right: USS Cassin, rear, USS Pennsylvania (US National Archives)

Those are the only ones I have in the book I just pulled off my shelf. I'm sure I could identify the others with a little more work, but I think we've established that this is thoroughly debunked.
posted by Dreadnought at 6:23 PM on January 21, 2010


San Francisco cocksucker
posted by Flashman at 6:24 PM on January 21, 2010 [2 favorites]


Uh, I'm mocking myself.

A little HAMBURGER never hurt. And it's not HAMBURGER annoying at all.
posted by delmoi at 6:25 PM on January 21, 2010


I was all amazed and then I read that it was fake and it was like, "awww. :("
posted by biochemist at 6:25 PM on January 21, 2010


« Older "Ahhh!" "No, not 'Ahhh!'"   |   "I am interested in the moments where things don’t... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments