PDA

View Full Version : Iwo Jima


cliveh
20th November 2010, 09:30 PM
Probably the most famous photograph ever made was the one by Joe Rosenthal of the flag being raised on Iwo Jima. I know this was not the first shot he did and to some extent it is staged, but for me the brilliance of this image is made by composition and the tiny gap between the soldiers hand and the flag. Any thoughts?

Trevor Crone
20th November 2010, 11:20 PM
It's an iconic image which we are so familiar with. Although I think the one on this site (http://www.sligocameraclub.org/2006/10/28/photo-icons-the-story-of-iwo-jima/) has been cropped. I have seen a horizontal version which may be full frame?

Yes, the gap of the solders hand reaching for the flag is a nice element.

Dave miller
21st November 2010, 08:13 AM
There are a couple more versions HERE (http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=Flag+on+Iwo+Jima&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=HtPoTN2HLd-qhAe7kaAP&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CDIQsAQwAQ&biw=1680&bih=899). I agree it is a very iconic photograph, perhaps re-enacted would be a better description than staged because it did happen, although possibly not so dramatically as depicted.

Richard Gould
21st November 2010, 08:23 AM
A very Iconic photograph,one of many that came out of that tragic conflict,Richard

ujjwaldey
21st November 2010, 11:11 AM
I had read somewhere that actually it 'was' the original version; not the re-enacted version.
The story goes that Joe Rosenthal was not sure the first days shot came out right, so he re-shot the enactment the next day. When the plates were developed, he assumed that the good one was the re-enacted version. Later, when he looked at them closely, he realised it was the shot from the previous day - the original shot.
I'm off to trawl the web to find a citation

ujjwaldey
21st November 2010, 11:13 AM
ah, here it is.
http://photography.about.com/od/famousphotographers/qt/flagraisingoveriwojimacontroversy.htm

I got a few details wrong in the post above; but the key point - it wasn't re-enacted seems to be correct

Trevor Crone
21st November 2010, 01:04 PM
ah, here it is.
http://photography.about.com/od/famousphotographers/qt/flagraisingoveriwojimacontroversy.htm

I got a few details wrong in the post above; but the key point - it wasn't re-enacted seems to be correct

I think the confusion arose from the one he set up which he entitled "Gung Oh". If you click on the link I've provided above and scroll down to the 3rd link there is the shot that caused the confusion.

There is also Genaust’s b&w movie clip on that site showing the actual sequence of them raising the flag that Rosenthal photographed.

ujjwaldey
21st November 2010, 01:49 PM
I think the confusion arose from the one he set up which he entitled "Gung Oh". If you click on the link I've provided above and scroll down to the 3rd link there is the shot that caused the confusion.

There is also Genaust’s b&w movie clip on that site showing the actual sequence of them raising the flag that Rosenthal photographed.

Indeed, and thats what makes it so iconic; as opposed to the 'Red Flag on Reichstag' by Khaldei

cliveh
21st November 2010, 08:42 PM
Isn’t that amazing, not the first flag, other shots, people milling around, other photographers, someone filming and yet he takes one of the world’s most iconic images. Is something else happening here?

Trevor Crone
21st November 2010, 09:59 PM
Isn’t that amazing, not the first flag, other shots, people milling around, other photographers, someone filming and yet he takes one of the world’s most iconic images. Is something else happening here?

There is a school of thought, and it has its origins in quantum physics - for something to exist it must first be observed - personally I think it's just good old serendipity;)

cliveh
21st November 2010, 10:21 PM
There is a school of thought, and it has its origins in quantum physics - for something to exist it must first be observed - personally I think it's just good old serendipity;)

Quantum physics, now your talking. I'm interested to learn more about this.

Trevor Crone
21st November 2010, 10:26 PM
Quantum physics, now your talking. I'm interested to learn more about this.

You asked for it :) - XXX (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread552646/pg1)

JimW
22nd November 2010, 05:55 PM
For something to exist it must first be observed? May I suggest that this theory is reconsidered with the non observed existence of the latent image....

Trevor Crone
22nd November 2010, 08:07 PM
For something to exist it must first be observed? May I suggest that this theory is reconsidered with the non observed existence of the latent image....

Jim, the latent image fits the quantum theory quite nicely for it cannot exist until its observed, and of course it is brought into existence by development for us to see. Before that the image is 'scrambled' by a quantum of photons (light) vibrating in a medium of light-sensitive material, it is in its raw state at the atomic level. Only a chemical reaction brings it to 'order' so that we may observe it, before that it is chaotic and unstable.

cliveh
22nd November 2010, 08:10 PM
Since being given the link about the Quantum Universe by that evil wizard Trevor Crone, I found myself disappearing down a space/time worm hole to a galaxy many millions of light years from earth and in a different universe. After many battles with the reticulons near the star of M2GIII, I was eventually able to eat the entire galaxy, which turned out to be made by a galactical branch of Cadbury’s. This enabled me to discover the technological secret for my return to earth. It has taken me many earth years to get back, upon which I realised I had in fact only been gone for an instant.

Trevor Crone
22nd November 2010, 08:59 PM
I'll say no more Clive - promise - :D

JimW
23rd November 2010, 05:39 PM
Trevor, I disagree. It does exist-if you developed two pieces of film, one with a latent image on it, and one without, you would prove the existence of the LATENT image..... Or have I misunderstood the term 'latent'? Existence of the undeveloped image is merely proved by subsequent developement-developement does not create the latent image. Next week-Shroedinger's cat.:confused:

Trevor Crone
23rd November 2010, 05:45 PM
Trevor, I disagree. It does exist-if you developed two pieces of film, one with a latent image on it, and one without, you would prove the existence of the LATENT image..... Or have I misunderstood the term 'latent'? Existence of the undeveloped image is merely proved by subsequent developement-developement does not create the latent image. Next week-Shroedinger's cat.:confused:

Jim, my lips are sealed:rolleyes: As for Schroedinger's cat you can shoot the damn thing......but hang on, haven't I already done that?;)

JimW
23rd November 2010, 05:54 PM
BRILLIANT! Best conclusion I have ever heard to that conundrum-thanks a lot, Trevor, I needed that laugh. Brilliant.

cliveh
23rd November 2010, 07:53 PM
Trevor, I disagree. It does exist-if you developed two pieces of film, one with a latent image on it, and one without, you would prove the existence of the LATENT image..... Or have I misunderstood the term 'latent'? Existence of the undeveloped image is merely proved by subsequent developement-developement does not create the latent image. Next week-Shroedinger's cat.:confused:

Development does not prove that one image didn’t contain a latent image, only that one image did. As for shroedinger’s cat, if you don’t observe it, it could be dead or alive.

Maris
24th November 2010, 04:25 AM
If you enjoy musings on quantum indeterminacy you would be familiar with Schrodinger's cat. Now this principle has been extended to the arts.

Schrodinger's Art:
It is not art or non-art until an observer interacts with the work and collapses the eigenstate!

FrankS
24th November 2010, 02:11 PM
There's no doubt that this is probably THE iconic photograph of the war in the Pacific theater. But let's face it guys, Joe Rosenthal put his skills to work and got lucky. Isn't it always like that? How many of us got the shot because we were in the right place at the right time and were ready for action? It happens.