Ok, Wikipedia and Google are no help with this specific question. It did confirm that instant photos came out around 1948 so that helps.... I'm trying to figure out: #1 how long an instant photo taken in say 1955 would last; #2 could the photo be reproduced from the negative (and if so, how many times)?; #3 can said photo be enhanced? For example could the photographic image be made sharper or if it is in black and white, could color be added? #4 I *think* the answer here is "no" but I'll ask - in the event that a photograph is taken with an instant camera in 1955, is there ANY way at all to tell from the data within the photo where it was taken? (Other than geographical clues like a certain tree or a house with the #79 on it.) #5 also related to #4, at what point did the instant photos start including data (meta data) that documented the location of the photo? I think it had to be when digital cameras made an appearance but I would like confirmation. Many thanks to all! I'm trying hard to pin down the specifics so I don't get someone criticizing me for not having done my homework.... Scott
gaaah! I wish I was at my work computer!! I have resources for this... in my genealogy studies, i had read a few articles on how to do historical research based on photographs, and it went into the methods used, years used, pros and cons of methods, how long they lasted/whether or not they would age well, etc.... *searches for notes*
Meta data is included, as far as I know, only in digital photo files. Analog photos would have no means of storing this information, so the answer must be no.
#1 how long an instant photo taken in say 1955 would last; the process of developing instant film is similar to the ambrotype. "Like a print on paper, it is viewed by reflected light. Like the daguerreotype, which it replaced, and like the prints produced by a Polaroid camera, each is a unique original that could only be duplicated by using a camera to copy it." -wikipedia an ambrotype is a early, not paper printing method that uses light and chemicals and all the other yada yada to make a negative, that a photo is made from with that being said, preservation of these photos are similar as well. keep free of oils and acidic paper (when people add photos to scrapbooks, especially in the older times, the paper of the scrapbooks/photo albums often used adhesive or had acidic paper that would make the photos fade quicker). And, I think we all have touched a photo as some point in time and left our finger prints permanently on them. keep in dark spaces; because the chemicals react to light, being exposed to light for any length of time shortens the photo's life span keep in a neutral environment. Too hot can damage the photo, too cold can damage the photo, etc. when cared for properly, photos can last decades! The most iconic photos from Marilyn Monroe to Warhol's work are still we well kept in galleries, though they all have been digitized. #2 could the photo be reproduced from the negative (and if so, how many times)?; yes, depending on the film. The quantity is also dependent on the film. #3 can said photo be enhanced? For example could the photographic image be made sharper or if it is in black and white, could color be added? in the '50s? no, not yet. when the instant photos came out in the '40s, they were sepia. then they moved to black and white. color film wasnt available until the '60s #4 I *think* the answer here is "no" but I'll ask - in the event that a photograph is taken with an instant camera in 1955, is there ANY way at all to tell from the data within the photo where it was taken? (Other than geographical clues like a certain tree or a house with the #79 on it.) its easier to date older photographs; tintypes, daguerreotype, and ambrotypes but its still VERY tricky unless you know what you're looking for. here is one of the videos I watched on the older types of photos. Because ambrotypes are similar to instant photos, im assuming the process of dating them is similar. as an additive, you cannot date a photo with absolute accuracy without looking at the details in the photo, like location, clothing, etc. you can guess by a series of assumptions... is it black and white? yes? than it was not taken in the '40s. #5 also related to #4, at what point did the instant photos start including data (meta data) that documented the location of the photo? I think it had to be when digital cameras made an appearance but I would like confirmation. im not sure about this, but i know i have a few rolls of kodak negatives. If you hold the film up to a light, the negatives have dates and time stamps on them. And I remember having to take the rolls to the store to have them developed, and they'd come back with a date on them. (i do not have my notes- they are at work so i had to search for the information; i used genealogy websites and wikipedia)
Neither of these would have been possible without modern computer technology. There was no GPS in 1955. If this is for a crime story, investigators, particularly the FBI had people who were very good at placing a photo based on clues in the picture.
I was going to say that with Polaroids (the most popular form of instant I'm aware of) there is no negative, but a google tells me that indeed there is. It remains sandwiched behind the print itself. That's why Polaroid photos are so thick. I know on roll film (not instant) when you'd get it back from the lab there was sometimes a date on the back of each print. I don't know if that was always true or depending on the lab, but I'm pretty sure the date was when the film was processed in the lab, not when the picture was taken. I don't know about the dates @J.T. Woody mentioned on the negative strip, but I would assume that was put there by the manufacturer to help identify the batch of film. Not at all sure, but it seems the most likely. There was no way a 'dumb' camera could put any kind of data on the film. I don't remember seeing even a date anywhere on a Polaroid print.
Yeah. I don't know if this is helpful, OP, but I was reading a western (set 1880's) by Louie L'Amour, and in it, the MC is hired to find a girl. He is given a photograph taken outdoors that contains digger pines and California poppies, both naive to California. He uses these clues to figure out that the girl had been in California.
Yeah, Polaroid photos were not dated, unless you thought to write the date on the back yourself. The dates printed in the margins of non-Polaroid photos of the era were stamped by the lab that processed them. These dates do not reflect the date the photos were taken. Sometimes those dates are months or even years past the date the pics were taken—depending on how long it took folks to finish a roll of film and get it to the processor. Although I grew up in the era of Polaroids (I was born in 1949), we never had one. Partly because they were expensive to buy and to use, and clunky to carry around, but mostly because the photos they took were so awful. They were fun at parties, etc, when you wanted to look at the photo right away, but beyond that, they were kinda useless. They were blurry, the colours were bizarre. I remember very dark reddish brown and a weird kind of turquoisy-green being the dominant colours ...on paper that went yellow really fast. These photos didn't last very well. It was worthwhile to just get an ordinary snapshot camera (Kodak was THE brand—Brownie, Instamatic, etc) and wait a few days for processing instead. I don't remember negatives for polaroid photos, but that's probably because I never used these cameras myself.
You would never see the negative, unless you peel apart the picture. Apparently it's inside there. Which makes me think of the one type of 'metadata' that could be on a Polaroid or instant photo that would help in an investigation. People did often write info on the back of Polaroids as mementos, to remember exactly when and where it was taken etc. Now obviously, depending on who took the picture and the nature of it, the photographer might not have wanted any such info there. But if it was an innocent photo (doubtful) or for some weird reason, he or somebody else might have scribbled info there. Possibly his wife (?) or somebody had a habit of writing such info on all the pictures and managed to get ahold of this one? A long shot, but it could work, maybe?
Your character might have written something that's only meaningful to himself on the back of any doubtful photo? Which might deepen the mystery in your story? Interesting about peeling the photo apart. I just did a quick rummage through our photo collection and couldn't find any Polaroids to check. But it will be fun to check when we do run across one. I think my husband has a few knocking around. Yeah ..writing on photos. It was not easy, because ballpoint ink tended to bleed into the back of the photo—as well as 'print' on the face of any photo stacked underneath it. And pencil tended to rub off. However, some folks (like me) still wrote dates and names on the backs of photos. It really helps with identification later on. My parents used fountain pens—before ballpoints came out—and the writing they made on the back of older photos is still quite legible. It's interesting to realise that photos take in the late 19th and early to mid 20th century are likely to outlast any prints made of photos today ...which are printed with much more ephemeral ink. Those older photos are really sturdy.
Wow, I should have asked here first instead of struggling with Google and Wikipedia. You folks know the answers. Oh, THANKS!!!! As a summary, this is for a crime story, yes. I'm trying to have a huge child pornography ring with this shadowy kingpin figure at the center of it and investigators are tracing the kingpins movements by looking through 30, 40 years worth of photos to identify similar locations and possibly victims. I do have a potential problem in that this is meant to be more than a straightforward "catch the bad guy" story. I really, really want to write some things down - which make sense to me - that will hopefully spark some thoughts within law enforcement or the computer IT industry as to how this process could be used to locate victims and help them. On paper, a lot of ideas I have make sense but when it comes to putting them into action...... I believe that child abuse is a form of terrorism against children. I have never understood why it has never gotten the funding or attention that going after terrorists or drug dealers does. If the funding to fight child abuse was somewhere like 10% of the funding to fight terrorism.... Well....child abuse will always be around but hopefully it could be caught before it escalated. So, I'm not a computer guru by any means but is it really that difficult to have code in the program of a digital camera that identifies problem content? Like there's already code that tells the camera whether the subject has blue, green or brown eyes, right? Code that tells the camera that when there are multiple people in the photo which is which so that the red shirt is on the right person, etc. Or which person has glasses on. Why can't there be code that identifies the genitals and can judge the size? If the camera takes a photo which sets off an internal warning, why can't that digital camera send off a warning to the local 911 center? "I am digital camera X at GPS location #. I was used to take an inappropriate photo at 2:03 pm on Jan 15, 2020. Please investigate." My characters can have conversations like this and then hopefully someone in the space reads it, hears about it and says, "Hey, that author has the right idea! Let's explore this option." Then if it works, they can put it into their products and sell millions of them. I'd buy it if it had built in software to protect kids and I think everybody would - I hope! Anyways....I want to sort of show the progression of everything when I do this, hence the history questions about instant cameras and whatnot. Thanks again! Scott
Probably it's possible, but mistakes in the software would be rife, I'm sure, and there's the privacy aspect. That's an invasion of privacy, to have an automatic alert system that notifies the police whenever the system deems a photo to be child pornography.
Ah! You should search the terms "photo analysis" and "photo forensics". Library of Congress as well as the National Archives have some good resources on how to analyse a photo. Also, universities have posted lectures as well. Wikipedia has the history of photo analysis/CSI photo analysis. I think those would be good resources especially as it is more closely alligned with your project.
Probably because many of the predators are among the wealthy and powerful. They protect grooming gangs all around the world. When people start to seriously investigate into it they tend to get disappeared. Well sure, that could happen, but not in America as we know it. It would be more like 1984, or like North Korea. We already have enough high-tech surveillance in our lives as it is—no more for me thanks. Especially if it directly violates our constitutional rights.
And look for the correct terms! I kept searching variations of " photo negatives" and "negative development" probably also "darkroom photo negative development" - I thought the problem was I was being too specific. This helps a lot. Thanks! Scott
[QUOTE="Xoic, post: 1853643, member: 92481" Well sure, that could happen, but not in America as we know it. It would be more like 1984, or like North Korea. We already have enough high-tech surveillance in our lives as it is—no more for me thanks. Especially if it directly violates our constitutional rights.[/QUOTE] Yah, probably. I just want to throw the idea out there and hope that it sparks some movement in the direction of developing technology to protect children. If someone in the computer field reads my story and says, "Hey, that's not a bad idea....privacy is a concern....what else can be done?" And then does do something.....mission accomplished! Scott
