Peculiar track image

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

As some sort of circus act? Certainly
As some sort of competitive cycling? Doubt it.

--
Paul M. Hobson
Georgia Institute of Technology
..:change the f to ph to reply:.

"Paul Hobson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

As some sort of circus act? Certainly
As some sort of competitive cycling? Doubt it.

--
Paul M. Hobson
Georgia Institute of Technology
.:change the f to ph to reply:.

OOohhh!!! A personal Velodrome track in your backyard. What a deal.
I wonder how come we all don't have these instead of swimming pools in our
backyards.

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

We're looking at one.

Circus acts and other entertainers did that back in the thirties.

Ron

RonSonic said:

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

We're looking at one.

Circus acts and other entertainers did that back in the thirties.

Ron

I wasn't sure whether this was an actual photo or had been doctored in
some way - the angle of the two cyclists high on the banking seems a
bit strange.

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

They're just waiting for the grapes to be piled in.

On 12 Sep 2006 06:46:23 -0700, "Rik O'Shea" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

RonSonic said:

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...
http://tinyurl.com/f9gr4

Did such a track ever exist ?

We're looking at one.

Circus acts and other entertainers did that back in the thirties.

Ron

I wasn't sure whether this was an actual photo or had been doctored in
some way - the angle of the two cyclists high on the banking seems a
bit strange.

Dear Rik,

Motorcycles in circus acts often extend that kind of track into a
ball-cage:

http://www.motorcycle-memories.com/Photos/916517-19.jpg

http://www.philip-sen.com/china1/1010.jpg

Here's the larger image of your picture:

http://www.nytstore.com/ProdImages/NSAPTR17_EXTR.jpg

And here's a page with some details:

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/Detlobjps.cfm?ObjectID=27160

"View of cyclists performing on the bicycle track on stage at Keith's
Union Square Theatre, N.Y.C."

Note the vaudeville backdrop.

Keith's vaudeville theater became the Keith-Orpheum chain, which later
turned into Radio Keith Orpheum, which morphed into RKO Pictures.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Rik O'Shea said:

Peculiar track image ...

A friend bought me the print for my birthday, and I have spent too much
time staring at it. It appears to be faked somehow, as there is no way
that the bikes would remain upright (examine the angle of the bike
relative to the angle of the track, and imagine trying to ride a bike
at this angle on flat ground). That's not to say that the act didn't
exist, or that the track couldn't be used, but I have the feeling that
it's been set up in order to make a good photograph. I can't see how
it was done, though, or what is holding the bikes and riders upright.
And how would you get the bike started on such a small track? Maybe
the act used a larger version of the track, and this was just set up
for the photo.

Mort

[email hidden] wrote:

-snip-

Quoted message said:

What I am not sure about in this photo is how it was lit.
It appears to be indoors with a main light just off the right
side and a fill light on the left. The puzzle for me is that
films in 1901-02 were quite slow and it seems they must
have had outrageously powerful lighting to take the picture
with very little motion blur.

Bingo! There's the answer. Film or coated glass plates were very slow @
that time. Even w/ high levels of light the cyclists had to ride very
slowly to reduce the blur. I think that perhaps I can see slight
blurring of the rider in the foreground.

Regards, John

john said:

[email hidden] wrote:

-snip-

Quoted message said:

What I am not sure about in this photo is how it was lit.
It appears to be indoors with a main light just off the right
side and a fill light on the left. The puzzle for me is that
films in 1901-02 were quite slow and it seems they must
have had outrageously powerful lighting to take the picture
with very little motion blur.

Bingo! There's the answer. Film or coated glass plates were very slow @
that time. Even w/ high levels of light the cyclists had to ride very
slowly to reduce the blur. I think that perhaps I can see slight
blurring of the rider in the foreground.

Regards, John

Dear John,

The riders are probably going at normal speeds for that kind of trick
riding, a surprisingly brisk pace.

Over twenty years earlier, it was already possible to take pictures
showing that all four hooves of a galloping horse were off the ground:

http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist3/sallie.html

Here's more on Eadweard Muybridge (don't mis-spell his name or fool
with his wife):

http://americanhistory.si.edu/muybridge/

It's easy to be misled by tattered old pictures, badly preserved,
taken by poor cameras and worse photographers. The riders on the
vaudeville stage track were photographed by someone who knew his
business, who had a good camera, and who enjoyed excellent indoor
lighting.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What I am not sure about in this photo is how it was lit.
It appears to be indoors with a main light just off the right
side and a fill light on the left. The puzzle for me is that
films in 1901-02 were quite slow and it seems they must
have had outrageously powerful lighting to take the picture
with very little motion blur.

Dear Ben,

Silver gelatin--see the picture in question and others of similar
bicycles at speed here:

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/Results.cfm?ParentID=234234

Vaudeville stages were routinely equipped with impressive lighting,
such as lime and arc lights, hence the term "in the limelight"--in the
early equivalent of the modern spotlight, a ball of lime heated by a
gas-oxygen-alcohol flame gave out a powerful beam focused by a
parabolic mirror.

Carl,

It's quite possible the picture was lit by arc lamps,
I have no experience with those, but it is not that
common to see old indoor photographs with motion
very stopped. Most of the other motion photos in that
gallery are outside, an exception being Dare Devil
Schreyer.

"Silver gelatin" just refers to the material of the print
in the museum's collection:
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/Detlobjps.cfm?ObjectID=27160
"printing-out paper, silver gelatin print."
Printing-out paper is a type of photographic paper
that self-develops during the exposure of the print,
rather than being chemically developed. (It has the
property of self-limiting the contrast, but that's a side
issue.)

Conventionally, "silver gelatin" prints are a silver
halide emulsion coated onto fiber based paper -
as opposed to platinum prints, albumen prints, etc.
If you see the term "silver print," that usually means
a silver halide emulsion on a resin coated paper,
which is a modern invention and looked down on
by some (but much easier to wash and dry). These
terms are illogical since the resin coated paper
still uses a silver gelatin emulsion, but that is the
convention.

By 1901 practically any commercial photo would have
used a silver halide negative. Other techniques were
just too slow, and reserved for printing.

Ben

Quoted message said:

john said:

[email hidden] wrote:

-snip-

Quoted message said:

What I am not sure about in this photo is how it was lit.
It appears to be indoors with a main light just off the right
side and a fill light on the left. The puzzle for me is that
films in 1901-02 were quite slow and it seems they must
have had outrageously powerful lighting to take the picture
with very little motion blur.

Bingo! There's the answer. Film or coated glass plates were very slow @
that time. Even w/ high levels of light the cyclists had to ride very
slowly to reduce the blur. I think that perhaps I can see slight
blurring of the rider in the foreground.

Regards, John

Dear John,

The riders are probably going at normal speeds for that kind of trick
riding, a surprisingly brisk pace.

Over twenty years earlier, it was already possible to take pictures
showing that all four hooves of a galloping horse were off the ground:

-snip-

I don't remember how that famous pix was made, but I believe that he
used a slot camera that moved the lens
@ the speed of the horses. That technique would not have been
appropriate for an overall exposure like this.

Quoted message said:

The riders on the
vaudeville stage track were photographed by someone who knew his
business, who had a good camera, and who enjoyed excellent indoor
lighting.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

I agree. The lighting & print quality is excellent; it's a wonderful
photo however it doesn't explain the verticalness of the riders. I
believe that if they had ridden at anything close to their cursing or
top speed they would have been 'whiz by' blurred images, particularly
the foreground rider. Don't forget that not only was film slow, but max
apertures were quite small & required some stopping down for decent
quality. And high-speed shutters didn't exist. I marvel at what Brady &
later photogs had to go through to get the results they got. Or even
Robert Cappa. 'Dem guys had balls.

Do you really believe that their near plumb angle on the track
represented anything near the max or cursing potential speed? I don't.

Regards, John

john said:

Quoted message said:

john said:

[email hidden] wrote:

-snip-

>
> What I am not sure about in this photo is how it was lit.
> It appears to be indoors with a main light just off the right
> side and a fill light on the left. The puzzle for me is that
> films in 1901-02 were quite slow and it seems they must
> have had outrageously powerful lighting to take the picture
> with very little motion blur.

Bingo! There's the answer. Film or coated glass plates were very slow @
that time. Even w/ high levels of light the cyclists had to ride very
slowly to reduce the blur. I think that perhaps I can see slight
blurring of the rider in the foreground.

Regards, John

Dear John,

The riders are probably going at normal speeds for that kind of trick
riding, a surprisingly brisk pace.

Over twenty years earlier, it was already possible to take pictures
showing that all four hooves of a galloping horse were off the ground:

-snip-

I don't remember how that famous pix was made, but I believe that he
used a slot camera that moved the lens
@ the speed of the horses. That technique would not have been
appropriate for an overall exposure like this.

Quoted message said:

The riders on the
vaudeville stage track were photographed by someone who knew his
business, who had a good camera, and who enjoyed excellent indoor
lighting.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

I agree. The lighting & print quality is excellent; it's a wonderful
photo however it doesn't explain the verticalness of the riders. I
believe that if they had ridden at anything close to their cursing or
top speed they would have been 'whiz by' blurred images, particularly
the foreground rider. Don't forget that not only was film slow, but max
apertures were quite small & required some stopping down for decent
quality. And high-speed shutters didn't exist. I marvel at what Brady &
later photogs had to go through to get the results they got. Or even
Robert Cappa. 'Dem guys had balls.

Do you really believe that their near plumb angle on the track
represented anything near the max or cursing potential speed? I don't.

Regards, John

Dear John,

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, they appear to be getting up to
speed, with the far rider at the top, the two intermediate riders on
the way down, and the foreground rider going across the flat stage and
about to climb.

Concerning Mybridge's cameras . . .

http://americanhistory.si.edu/muybridge/htm/htm_sec2/sec2.htm

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[email hidden] wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

As for the asymmetric riders and how they get started, here's the
large version of the picture:

http://www.nytstore.com/ProdImages/NSAPTR17_EXTR.jpg

It's likely that the riders are not yet cruising around and around the
rim of the bowl. They start from the bottom, not the top.

Instead, they're probably getting started and building speed, climbing
the far bank and then dropping down across the floor in the
foreground.

Note that the far rider is up at the top of the banking, the near
rider is going across the flat floor, and the two riders in-between
are about half-way up the banking.

The climbing and top rider are hunched down, while the descending and
floor rider are almost upright. After they build up speed and sort out
their spacing a bit better, they gradually work up onto the rim all
the time.

Notice how the riders further up the bowl are using
'drop bars' and the others are using upright bars. The
straight steep forks and high hand positions are just like those
used by modern 'artistic cyclists.'

Just cruising around the bowl would put the audience
to sleep--this aint exactly the motorcyclists' Ball of Death.
I would guess that there is some kind of
crazy routine that they performed, with the two riders
with drop bars cruising the bowl and the other two
performing more acrobatic feats around them.

All of them are TOO COOL to use brakes.

Robert

In article
<[email hidden]>,

john said:

I don't remember how that famous pix was made, but I believe that he
used a slot camera that moved the lens
@ the speed of the horses. That technique would not have been
appropriate for an overall exposure like this.

You believe it; should I believe it too. If you had
credible evidence you would have the option not to
believe.

--
Michael Press

Quoted message said:

As for the asymmetric riders and how they get started, here's the
large version of the picture:

http://www.nytstore.com/ProdImages/NSAPTR17_EXTR.jpg

Thanks for my new desktop picture.

Ron

RonSonic said:

Quoted message said:

As for the asymmetric riders and how they get started, here's the
large version of the picture:

http://www.nytstore.com/ProdImages/NSAPTR17_EXTR.jpg

Thanks for my new desktop picture.

Ron

Dear Ron,

You might try to merge it with this:

http://home.comcast.net/~eschermc/Ascending_and_Descending.jpg

Cheers,

Carl Fogel