The war photographers worked with collodion-on-glass (wet-plate) negatives, which required delicate and laborious procedures even in the studio. When the photographer was ready for action, a sheet of glass was cleaned, coated with collodion, partially dried, dipped carefully into a bath containing nitrate of silver, then exposed in the camera for several seconds and processed in the field darkroom tent—all before the silver collodion mixture had dried. Given the danger of their situation and the technical difficulty of their task, front-line photographers rarely if ever attempted action scenes. More info . I'll post more after work.
Mr White, posting well reasoned and concisely written responses to silly troll posts!
This is classy. I buy you POAL GOALD!
It's what we do. Cheers!
That’s utter bullshit.
They had these elaborate photography set ups that they would set up in the field to photograph these fucking satanic clowns having their picnics but never once attempted to actually capture a national conflict.
All battle scenes are drawings.
Yet they had amazing photo set ups on hand and didn’t use them to capture the actual conflict because it was too dangerous?? Weren’t they still using drummer boys ffs? People were not pussies. Incredible new technology. National war of unmatched significance. NO PHOTOS.
Lolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol
(post is archived)