Russian/Soviet photos in old books

Henry Sakaida · 01-27-2004, 06:47 PM

I have alot of old Soviet war books. In many of them, the photo quality is extremely poor. I'm sure you know what I mean. The books are printed on poor quality paper and the photos appear almost like drawings. I can't decide if they are actually drawings based on real photos, or whether the printing technology altered the photos to look like drawings.
Please put my mind to rest. Thank you!

HENRY

***DougD*** · 01-27-2004, 07:15 PM

I am always having the same problem...it seems to me that most of them are photos that have been touched up, sometimes adding details such as higher rank that were not there when the original photo was taken.

DougD

otlichnik · 01-28-2004, 04:20 AM

Doug is right that there are many faked photos. There is a large beautiful hardcover coffee table book on that subject, although I forget the title.

But the faking is not the cause of the poor quality. It is the poor quality photography, developing and mass printing technology and supplies of the time. Especially around the war.

Shawn

Kim · 01-28-2004, 06:13 AM

Here is a website about re-writing history by re-touching photos.

http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/

/Kim

Henry Sakaida · 01-28-2004, 09:45 AM

Thank you all for your feedback!I'll get to the bottom of this!

HENRY

Ed_Haynes · 01-28-2004, 11:02 AM

Are we talking about photos retouched for political reasons or photos retouched to "improve quality" of the photographic representation, to sharpen fuzzy details. I'd think the latter? And it surely a more relevant question for us to be concerned with.

(Although removing a troublesome and recently deceased personage might well be seen by those who did it as improving the quality of the image ...?)

Ed

Stephende · 01-28-2004, 11:30 AM

Remember that the most famous photo of them all- flying the flag over the reichstag - was a re-enactment; not unlike the American equivalent of raising the flag over Iwo Jima. Does that diminish its impact or mean that it is "fake"? That is certainly open to a broader discussion on the meanings of history and historical perspective.

I would actually not agree that Soviet wartime photos were of poor quality. check out the collection of Slava Katamidze on the Hulton Archive website. What seems to have happened is that many publishers used 2nd or 3rd generation photos w/o access to the original negatives.

The book referred to above is titled "The Commisar Vanishes."

01-27-2004, 06:47 PM	#1
Henry Sakaida Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 104	Russian/Soviet photos in old books I have alot of old Soviet war books. In many of them, the photo quality is extremely poor. I'm sure you know what I mean. The books are printed on poor quality paper and the photos appear almost like drawings. I can't decide if they are actually drawings based on real photos, or whether the printing technology altered the photos to look like drawings. Please put my mind to rest. Thank you! HENRY

01-27-2004, 07:15 PM	#2
*DougD* Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: NJ Age: 35 Posts: 2,299	Same problem I am always having the same problem...it seems to me that most of them are photos that have been touched up, sometimes adding details such as higher rank that were not there when the original photo was taken. DougD

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Soviet PHOTO Books of the War	Dave	Soviet Militaria For Sale Archive	2	10-28-2007 08:14 AM
WWII - Books Collection in Russian	clebercalado	History references	4	03-12-2005 12:38 PM
Soviet Perspective of the Front - Lots of Photos	yolkin	Online references	1	07-23-2004 12:06 PM

01-28-2004, 04:20 AM	#3
otlichnik Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Currently in Bosnia Age: 41 Posts: 856	Doug is right that there are many faked photos. There is a large beautiful hardcover coffee table book on that subject, although I forget the title. But the faking is not the cause of the poor quality. It is the poor quality photography, developing and mass printing technology and supplies of the time. Especially around the war. Shawn

01-28-2004, 06:13 AM	#4
Kim Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 308	Here is a website about re-writing history by re-touching photos. http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/ /Kim

01-28-2004, 09:45 AM	#5
Henry Sakaida Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 104	Thank you all for your feedback!I'll get to the bottom of this! HENRY

01-28-2004, 11:02 AM	#6
Ed_Haynes Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Earth, USA, SC Posts: 238	Are we talking about photos retouched for political reasons or photos retouched to "improve quality" of the photographic representation, to sharpen fuzzy details. I'd think the latter? And it surely a more relevant question for us to be concerned with. (Although removing a troublesome and recently deceased personage might well be seen by those who did it as improving the quality of the image ...?) Ed

01-28-2004, 11:30 AM	#7
Stephende Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: California Posts: 33	Remember that the most famous photo of them all- flying the flag over the reichstag - was a re-enactment; not unlike the American equivalent of raising the flag over Iwo Jima. Does that diminish its impact or mean that it is "fake"? That is certainly open to a broader discussion on the meanings of history and historical perspective. I would actually not agree that Soviet wartime photos were of poor quality. check out the collection of Slava Katamidze on the Hulton Archive website. What seems to have happened is that many publishers used 2nd or 3rd generation photos w/o access to the original negatives. The book referred to above is titled "The Commisar Vanishes."

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)