Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support Forumscolor photos from 1930's and 40's
found this awesome link online today
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-501465_162-10011709.html?tag=page
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 1672 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
color photos from 1930's and 40's (Original Post)
gabeana
Sep 2012
OP
Quite a bit of the A part of the world was in color. The B part was black and white. n/t
dimbear
Sep 2012
#3
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)1. Interesting, very good quality. Confused me though:
I was watching some old movies on TCM and I could have sworn the whole world was in black & white in those days. Go figure.
Really though, seeing color makes it more believable somehow; like I could see myself being there without too much a stretch of imagination.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)3. Quite a bit of the A part of the world was in color. The B part was black and white. n/t
raccoon
(31,135 posts)6. Same here, somehow it seems as if the pre-me past occurred in black and white. nt
graywarrior
(59,440 posts)2. Those are great!
Thanks for posting.
tjwmason
(14,819 posts)4. Fascinating
Thanks for posting...it took a remarkably long time for the technology to spread.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)8. The reason was because it was quite expensive
Kodachrome came out in the mid 30's, but both the film and the processing were much more expensive than B&W.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)5. Cool! Who knew the Library of Congress had a Flickr account...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/library_of_congress/sets/72157603671370361/
Apparently, these were done on Kodachrome, which was very expensive back then, so the number of chromes was limited.
But, while Kodachrome made color photography available to the (well-off) masses, guess when and where this one was taken:
Apparently, these were done on Kodachrome, which was very expensive back then, so the number of chromes was limited.
But, while Kodachrome made color photography available to the (well-off) masses, guess when and where this one was taken:
Bombero1956
(3,539 posts)7. I've seen some of those images before at this site