More Pictures from the Edwardian Parr Family of Seymour Road - Harringay online2024-03-29T13:23:09Zhttps://harringayonline.com/forum/topics/more-pictures-from-the-edwardian-parr-family-of-seymour-road?feed=yes&xn_auth=noAs others say multiple exposu…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-24:844301:Comment:10374742017-11-24T12:57:36.929ZRichard Woodshttps://harringayonline.com/profile/RichardWoods
<p>As others say multiple exposures were easy to do but there was little way of adjusting the exposure to match the picture so images became ghosts. The film stock looks like 120 5:4 to me. Roll film of 12 exposures per roll. This week i noticed that a can of 35mm x36 currently costs £12.99 - without dev and print! Isn't digital grand!</p>
<p>As others say multiple exposures were easy to do but there was little way of adjusting the exposure to match the picture so images became ghosts. The film stock looks like 120 5:4 to me. Roll film of 12 exposures per roll. This week i noticed that a can of 35mm x36 currently costs £12.99 - without dev and print! Isn't digital grand!</p> I think the Brownie Mk 2, int…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-18:844301:Comment:10359742017-11-18T15:41:15.881ZJohn Dhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/JohnD
<p>I think the Brownie Mk 2, introduced a few years later, gave rectangular format pictures.</p>
<p>I think the Brownie Mk 2, introduced a few years later, gave rectangular format pictures.</p> Thanks Gordon. If Brownie pho…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-18:844301:Comment:10358862017-11-18T13:05:28.852ZHughhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/hjuk
<p>Thanks Gordon. If Brownie photos were 1:1 ratio, the it doesn't look like these images were captured using a Brownie. They seem to be more like a 5:4. </p>
<p>Thanks Gordon. If Brownie photos were 1:1 ratio, the it doesn't look like these images were captured using a Brownie. They seem to be more like a 5:4. </p> In 1900 Kodak introduced the…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-18:844301:Comment:10357922017-11-18T10:59:38.978ZGordon Thttps://harringayonline.com/profile/GordonT
<p>In 1900 Kodak introduced the 'Brownie' camera at a price of 5 shillings, it took six 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 pictures on roll film. Good contextual article <strong><a href="https://blog.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/a-z-photography-collection-b-is-for-brownie/" target="_blank">here</a></strong>, written by Colin Harding, ex-National Media Museum chief.</p>
<p>In 1900 Kodak introduced the 'Brownie' camera at a price of 5 shillings, it took six 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 pictures on roll film. Good contextual article <strong><a href="https://blog.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/a-z-photography-collection-b-is-for-brownie/" target="_blank">here</a></strong>, written by Colin Harding, ex-National Media Museum chief.</p> Indeed it does. Simple once y…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-18:844301:Comment:10357812017-11-18T09:03:57.831ZHughhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/hjuk
Indeed it does. Simple once you know how, but still rather more advanced than just pushing a button. I hadn’t realised that camera ownership was at all widespread amongst families with modest incomes in this period let alone that they were getting beyond the basics in their home snaps.
Indeed it does. Simple once you know how, but still rather more advanced than just pushing a button. I hadn’t realised that camera ownership was at all widespread amongst families with modest incomes in this period let alone that they were getting beyond the basics in their home snaps. Looks like a triple exposure…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-18:844301:Comment:10357132017-11-18T08:21:58.578ZJohn Dhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/JohnD
<p>Looks like a triple exposure Hugh. Very easy to do ( usually accidentally ) with the simple cameras of the time. Just don't wind on the film between exposures.</p>
<p>Looks like a triple exposure Hugh. Very easy to do ( usually accidentally ) with the simple cameras of the time. Just don't wind on the film between exposures.</p> "Mysterious Stan" is, as I'm…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-17:844301:Comment:10359452017-11-17T23:45:58.363ZHughhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/hjuk
<p>"<em>Mysterious Stan</em>" is, as I'm sure most people know, a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_exposure#Double_exposure" target="_blank">double-exposure</a> image. I may well just be showing my ignorance of the history of amateur photography, but I was surprised to see this technique being used in such an everyday matter so long ago. </p>
<p>"<em>Mysterious Stan</em>" is, as I'm sure most people know, a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_exposure#Double_exposure" target="_blank">double-exposure</a> image. I may well just be showing my ignorance of the history of amateur photography, but I was surprised to see this technique being used in such an everyday matter so long ago. </p> I like the one of dog on chai…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-17:844301:Comment:10357692017-11-17T23:22:09.456ZGeraldinehttps://harringayonline.com/profile/GeraldineTaylorThomas
<p>I like the one of dog on chair in August Bank Holiday 1903. Somehow you know it isn't Parr Senior who's boss in that house. Photos like Mysterious Stan were very popular at that time. Fairies in the garden and so on. It's a great collection. Thanks for sharing it with us, Hugh.</p>
<p>I like the one of dog on chair in August Bank Holiday 1903. Somehow you know it isn't Parr Senior who's boss in that house. Photos like Mysterious Stan were very popular at that time. Fairies in the garden and so on. It's a great collection. Thanks for sharing it with us, Hugh.</p> This photo was taken about 25…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-17:844301:Comment:10357022017-11-17T19:32:57.279ZJoeWhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/joew
<p>This photo was taken about 25 minutes later:</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2162871213?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="721" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2162871213?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024"/></a></p>
<p>(Plus 110 years)</p>
<p>This photo was taken about 25 minutes later:</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2162871213?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="721" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2162871213?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024"/></a></p>
<p>(Plus 110 years)</p> Didn't the clock tower look s…tag:harringayonline.com,2017-11-17:844301:Comment:10357432017-11-17T15:15:51.411ZJohn McMullanhttps://harringayonline.com/profile/bogan72
<p>Didn't the clock tower look so much better when it wasn't part of a massive traffic island?</p>
<p>Didn't the clock tower look so much better when it wasn't part of a massive traffic island?</p>