0
1

[–] 16809196? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Most of the still photos taken by the military were made using a military issued Speed Graphic 4x5" camera using sheet film. Even Tr-X, the fastest regularly issued film had an ASA rating of 400, and although "grainy", contact prints made from the negatives were equivalent or better in definition than the most sophisticated digital cameras of today. Motion pictures made by military combat cameramen were filmed with 16mm black and white film usually ASA 25. The color films were usually Kodachrome, ASA 10 or ASA 12. (The lower the ASA number, the "slower" the film, I.e. The finer the grain.). Amateur cameras were almost always either 120 or 620 film which yielded a negative image of 3x5 inches. The images seen in newspapers, books, etc. are usually third or fourth generation copies of copies. If you have viewed the first generation prints from 4x5" negatives made by Combat cameramen, you would be able to see incredible detail -- the threads in clothing for example.

0
0

[–] 16808863? ago 

You CLEARLY do not know what you are talking about.

0
1

[–] 16809985? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

That's because your parents are too cheap to get a good camera faggot

0
1

[–] 16810119? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I used those old press box cameras for fingerprint work. Those 4X5 negatives were awesome to blow up for court presentation. Crystal clear.

0
0

[–] 16810026? [S] ago 

I see 2 bots double posting in this thread posting the exact same comment... Looks like you are on to something Anon. Good work and God Speed.

0
0

[–] 16808815? ago 

Camera tech was completely different then. Digital CCDs and pixels weren't a thing until the late 60s.

0
0

[–] 16822834? ago 

There was no digital photography in the 60s. More like the 1990s.