[–] 16808815? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
Camera tech was completely different then. Digital CCDs and pixels weren't a thing until the late 60s.
[–] 16822834? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
There was no digital photography in the 60s. More like the 1990s.
[–] 16808600? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
The were using a fine grain B/W film like Kodak Tri-X- Pan ASA 25 ultra fine grain B/W film. Incredibly fine detail and range of contrast when properly exposed.
[–] 16808558? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
Emulsion ftw
[–] 16808300? 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) 1.8 years ago
This is the dumbest post I've seen today and that's really saying something.
[–] 16808212? 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) 1.8 years ago
Why does that surprise you? Professional quality photography of 70 years ago was way better quality than consumer snap shots from 30 years ago.
[–] 16808884? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
I was going to say that but this writer is too stupid to get it.
[–] 16807861? 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 1.8 years ago
Technicolor-b
[–] 16808815? ago
Camera tech was completely different then. Digital CCDs and pixels weren't a thing until the late 60s.
[–] 16822834? ago
There was no digital photography in the 60s. More like the 1990s.