Dome Rock - Early example of photoshopping?

[Todd Hackett]

At first glance, it looks like the train may have been added to the second view. The shadows are nearly identical indicating same time of day and time of year, and the clutter around the depot hasn't moved or changed. Looking closer, the angle isn't quite the same. The one with the train appears to be taken from a little lower down the hill and farther to the right, so they may have been taken around the same time, one while the train was at the station and the other just before it arrived or after it left.





Here's another contemporary view just below the station (which was printed backward, so this is mirrored):



And another just above:

[Dave Eggleston]

Wow, a great set of shots, especially as a lovely reference as to what the early track looked like. Thanks for sharing!

I've seen more than one example of multiple exposures taken minutes apart in other places. Off the top of my head there are 2-3 taken in Sunset within a short time and Floyd Hill has a pair taken maybe less than 60 minutes apart and in Battle Mountain, Nevada, there are a pair, one with and one without a CP train but the Nevada Central train is there in both. It must've been both a great effort and a difficult choice to take a second glass plate in a very short time.  

[Jim Courtney]

Bless you, Todd. Another great discussion thread!

Don't forget Derrell Poole's "trick" caboose photo, a true example of photo shopping while printing.




This was an Otto Westerman photo(s) and print: The caboose and railroaders photographed at Como, the background printed from a second negative of the Buena Vista with Collegiate Range in the background.




To read how I and others were suckered in: http://c-sng-discussion-forum.41377.n7.nabble.com/Is-this-Derrell-s-Eight-wheel-caboose-on-the-C-amp-Sng-td567.html#a602

[bcp]

When the poles in the two photos are in line, The trees, rocks and building are not aligned.  The camera is in a slightly different spot for the two photos.   It seems unlikely to me the photographer would move several yards between photos.

Bruce Pryor

 

[Todd Hackett]

bcp wrote

... It seems unlikely to me the photographer would move several yards between photos....

As unlikely as it seems, I think that's what happened. When you look at the full image from both photos, you'll see that they are the same dimensions & proportions, just with one in portrait and the other landscape, and that the rock and depot are both practically the same size. This seems to indicate that the distance from the camera to the depot or rock didn't change much and the camera had the same plate size and lens focal length (or the focal length and plate size changed in exact proportion, which isn't likely). It's unlikely that two photographers brought identical cameras or that Jackson lugged two nearly identical cameras up the hill (although he must have at least brought two plates). Everything else is just too close for these to be from different trips to the site. I'm pretty sure that my print for the portrait-oriented photo is a contact print from the original glass plate, and it's 11"x14". This is much smaller than his 18"x22" mammoth plates, but I understand that he used a variety of cameras.

The two photos are lined up in the following image so that dome rock  lines up. The landscape-oriented one has the depot lower and to the right with the background ridge higher. If I have figured out the perspective correctly, this puts the camera to the left and above the location for the portrait-oriented shot.

[Chris Walker]

You're missing the point, Jackson decided to move slightly so as to avoid showing the Switchstand type then at Dome Rock.   Sort of a Hardware phobia. Also transit of the Sun has moved the chimney shadow one row of Shingles down.  

Just a little deja vu http://c-sng-discussion-forum.41377.n7.nabble.com/Dome-Rock-Switchstand-td5866.html