DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> World's first photograph
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 32, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 09/05/2006 12:08:00 PM · #1
When I was surfing the net today, suddenly I went to a web site through google where I saw world’s first photograph by Joseph Nicephore Niepce. So I thought why not share it with you, my great photographic friends.
Link follows:
//www.oswaldgallery.com/site/firstphoto.htm

//www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/permanent/wfp/
 09/05/2006 12:09:03 PM · #2
Could use more contrast and maybe some USM, coposition is spot on. ;)
 09/05/2006 12:10:20 PM · #3
Originally posted by idnic:
Could use more contrast and maybe some USM, coposition is spot on. ;)


LOL!
 09/05/2006 12:10:54 PM · #4
They should have used Neat Image. ;-)

I've read that the exposure was so long that shawdows are cast in both directions.

The University of Texas library has some cool stuff. This photograph and a Gutenberg bible and more.
 09/05/2006 12:13:46 PM · #5
DNMC

Actually, it's pretty cool.
 09/05/2006 12:25:37 PM · #6
And we thought we had some great young photographers on this site!:

"Niepce first theorized that light-sensitive compounds could be used to produce imagery, and began his initial experiments in 1816." Yes, at the ripe old age of 15.

09/05/2006 01:00:25 PM · #7
Originally posted by PERCOM:
//www.oswaldgallery.com/site/firstphoto.htm

This is a good 'first' effort. However, can't quite put my finger on it but it needs something more. It has no "wow" factor whatsoever and has a weak connection to the challenge topic.

Contrast and colors are very weak. It is possible Mr. Niepce used the wrong lense choice for this shot, but it is hard to tell for sure. The image appears 'flat' and the dents in the tin-type are a major distraction. Can't say the border adds much to the composition either. The technical quality suffers from insufficient post processing. Mr. Niepce would definitely benefit from a basic post processing course.
 09/05/2006 01:03:03 PM · #8
that photo is no where near processed enough for the likings of this crowd. Has anyone attempted to photoshop it?
09/05/2006 01:15:19 PM · #9
Well I am confused now as I thought the man acredited with inventing photography was an English Chemist called "William Fox Talbot" in 1838 ?
09/05/2006 01:19:00 PM · #10
Originally posted by Palendrone:
Well I am confused now as I thought the man acredited with inventing photography was an English Chemist called "William Fox Talbot" in 1838 ?

Maybe that was the first with a silver-salts emulsion ... Niepce's process used completely different chemicals ... but it is the earliest image permanently recorded by means of light's action on an emulsion.

Not that is couldn't have been invented by the Romans.

Message edited by author 2006-09-05 13:22:38.
 09/05/2006 01:22:41 PM · #11
The camera obscura was around much earlier

LOL I'm too slow :P


Camera Obscura

Message edited by author 2006-09-05 13:23:24.
 09/05/2006 01:27:34 PM · #12
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
that photo is no where near processed enough for the likings of this crowd. Has anyone attempted to photoshop it?


Maybe we should make that a challenge. :-)
 09/05/2006 01:28:13 PM · #13
It's amazing that someone so young could have a profound impact on society even to this day. Perhaps it is his youth and the ignorance of the 'rules' that kept him from saying 'It can't be done!'
So basically screw the rules, lets have some fun!
09/05/2006 01:28:18 PM · #14
The camera obscura only projects the image, but doesn't record it -- unless you position a photosenitive emulsion inside ... as was brought up in another thread.
Originally posted by ralfw:
Ok, now let's start guessing at the focal ratio...

Based on the pictures I've seen of the project - let's say the focal length is 50 feet and the aperture is 1/2 inch (gumball sized opening) - in other words, f/1200 perhaps. (I'm only guessing on the room dimensions, and presuming the "lens" opening is about 1/2 inch.) Or, f/2400 if the focal length is 100' with the same lens opening.
Kind of interesting.

I drove the base at lunch today - couldn't find the facility yet - it's a maze of old, overgrown roads on 300+ acres. No signs, at least not that I could spot today. I'll explore some more in a day or so and report back. No one to ask where building 115 is! (Let alone ask where the "camera obscura" is... "the wha....?" they'd probably say.)

Stay tuned - more info when I find the building and someone to talk to. I'd like to know more about the dimensions of the "camera". What I know so far is that the image will be about 111 feet by about 31 feet, and the "lens" opening is gumball sized. We're still missing some variables here!

Did find this:

Diagram Link

Based on that diagram, the focal length is 56 feet, aperture is 3/4 inch, so f/896 is our ratio! Wow, now THAT'S SHARP!


Message edited by author 2006-09-05 13:29:57.
 09/05/2006 01:34:22 PM · #15
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The camera obscura only projects the image, but doesn't record it -- unless you position a photosenitive emulsion inside ... as was brought up in another thread.


I'm still waiting on someone to try it with banks of CMOS or CCD snesors. I challenge someone here to turn a van into a really large digital camera. :-)
 09/05/2006 01:36:12 PM · #16
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The camera obscura only projects the image, but doesn't record it -- unless you position a photosenitive emulsion inside ... as was brought up in another thread.


I'm still waiting on someone to try it with banks of CMOS or CCD snesors. I challenge someone here to turn a van into a really large digital camera. :-)

Like the FBI really needs your help thinking up new ways to spy on us ... thanks : )
 09/05/2006 01:38:56 PM · #17
sounds like a TV show for the Discovery Channel.

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:


I'm still waiting on someone to try it with banks of CMOS or CCD snesors. I challenge someone here to turn a van into a really large digital camera. :-)

09/05/2006 01:46:07 PM · #18
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The camera obscura only projects the image, but doesn't record it -- unless you position a photosenitive emulsion inside ... as was brought up in another thread.


I'm still waiting on someone to try it with banks of CMOS or CCD snesors. I challenge someone here to turn a van into a really large digital camera. :-)


It's been done for pinhole photography - but the images are several feet wide, so would require a huge digi-sensor!

//www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,59929,00.html
 09/05/2006 01:46:16 PM · #19
From the link:

"The approximately eight-hour long exposure required to make the heliograph was projected on a polished pewter plate coated with bitumen of Judea (an asphalt compound). The plate was then washed in a mixture of oil of lavender and turpentine, which dissolved away the areas that were not hardened by the exposure. The result was a direct positive image, where the residual bitumen represented the highlights and the visible portions of the pewter plate represented the shadows."

The guy clearly needed a faster lens.
 09/05/2006 01:47:34 PM · #20
Originally posted by PERCOM:
When I was surfing the net today, suddenly I went to a web site through google where I saw world’s first photograph by Joseph Nicephore Niepce. So I thought why not share it with you, my great photographic friends.
Link follows:
//www.oswaldgallery.com/site/firstphoto.htm

//www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/permanent/wfp/


FYI, there is a reproduction (an image created using the same process from the same location on similar materials) in the Museum of photography in Bradford, UK.
09/05/2006 01:56:34 PM · #21
Increase the contrast and you can make out the building's lines.


09/05/2006 01:58:24 PM · #22
I couldn't resist...so I did a bit of PSing to see what happened.

The first has had levels, curves, selective color, a bit of cloning out spots and scratches, NoisewarePro. The others are quick and dirty Artistic effects at default settings...DryBrush, Fresco, and Watercolor respectively.



Anyone else?
 09/05/2006 02:01:38 PM · #23
Originally posted by jemison:


Dear Lord, is that... is that.... a wedge of cheese????
 09/05/2006 02:03:09 PM · #24
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by jemison:


Dear Lord, is that... is that.... a wedge of cheese????


Slice of pizza maybe?
 09/05/2006 02:09:33 PM · #25
Yes, it is cheese... muhahahahaha! I'm evil and I am everywhere! :-)

Take that to the DPC conspiracy thread :-D
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:09:43 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:09:43 PM EDT.