ftknox

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Shoot To Thrill!, and we'd love to have your photo added to the group.

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Mal's Best of the Best, and we'd love to have your photo added to the group.

I was very often thinking why I have different feeling from these very old photographs.. They usually have very low depth of field, which is understandable, but they also have amazing space.. I realized it when I was looking to the Library of Congress sets.. Almost all pictures have slightly shorter focus (closer to the camera). Notice that the focus is to the grass before tank, and not to the tank itself. Today's practice is to focus directly to the point of interest (eyes in the portrait photography, tank turret in this case..)

Just thinking of the military aspect.

How succesful was this tank on the battlefield?

Simply beautiful
MAURICIO

M3 "Stuart" Light Tank

The quality of theese shots is great. Could be mistaken for contemporary shots (set aside the technology).

Fredo, a film transparency is equivalent to about 5,000 lpi resolution. It's more like today's digital technology is catching up with the old quality.

Right. But I was not commenting on the image resolution. Besides, on a image resolution this small (500x400) such a source resolution is pointless. My purpose was rather to comment image quality such as color balance, hue and definition, which in my opinion is quite remarkable for an exposure taken in the 1940's. In refering to the "technology", I was refering to the tanks... Regards.

Hi Alfred, a great shot! I like it very much! Maybe you would like to post some of your pictures on www.military-vehicle-photos.com I think the visitors over there would like that very much. Regards, Alf , The Netherlands.

The guy on the left must have been driving the lead tank -- he's sunburned, but clean. (Maybe he had time to wash up before getting his photo taken.)

This looks like it was taken yesterday! Unbelievable quality.