
Undeveloped Film from a Soldier in WWII Discovered and Processed - benbreen
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/16/31-rolls-undeveloped-film-soldier-wwii-discovered-processed/
======
jdnier
It pains me to see him unwrapping paper-backed rolls of film in room light,
then using a strobe to document the appearance of the the roll (before
developing). The fogging you see at the top and bottom edges of some rolls is
from light leaking around the edges of loosely-rolled spools; it happens even
with modern 120 roll film. There's a good chance he's fogging some of the
rolls due to his handling.

~~~
Amarandei
I was actually watching him do that and I was thinking the same thing. I don't
know anything about developing but I was thinking that if the casing has even
a tiny crack then the camera flash would ruin at least one photo. The nice
thing to do would be to send him a friendly email and tell him about it. Maybe
he just doesn't realize it.

------
dghughes
Hey! I know that clicky clicky sound well as you ratchet on the film onto the
wheel I even have a similar style developer tank only a bit smaller.

I really miss doing that it's been I get 20 years since I've developed any
film it's amazing how time flies. Digital photography just doesn't have the
soul of actual film photography it's missing the physical connection. Although
I don't miss the stink of the fixer.

It's 120 rollfim too for medium a format camera which would give a nice image
since it quite a bit larger and has more surface area than a 35mm negative.

For such old film I figured this would have been done in a lab not in a
kitchen I'd be concerned with water temperature with such old film. Maybe even
soak the film in water to let it hydrate a bit maybe since he indicate they
rolls may stick they've been rolled up for so long.

I do wish I had a better method to scan my old negatives and skip the printing
part I did try it without much success in the mid 1990s with my first flatbed
scanner.

Interesting stuff! It makes me want to pick up the old cameras again.

~~~
sharkweek
I know this sounds a bit "get off my lawn" even for only being in my late 20s,
but I REALLY enjoyed darkroom time in high school photography classes and
photography personally lost some of its magic to me when I switched. I was a
senior just as digital was making its moves, but nothing was quite as
satisfying as the trials and tribulations of meticulously processing film in
that tiny little room.

Nothing quite as cool as dropping what seemed like a blank piece of paper into
some chemicals and watching it transition into an actual photograph.

~~~
ghaff
Yeah, on the other hand, I never had easy access to a good darkroom after
leaving school and pretty much ended up shooting color slides for a number of
years--which meant, in practice, that I pretty much just shot slides on some
vacations.

The combination of digital photography and the ease of sharing really got me
back into doing photography as a more routine thing. And the capabilities of
modern digital gear are just so amazing. I still remember all the chemical
manipulations I would go through to get decent results from B&W at ISO 1600 or
maybe a little faster. Today, I can easily surpass that in color with the
twist of a dial.

------
ncza
Direct link instead of "relevant third-party content rehosted in a company
blog": [http://www.rescuedfilm.com/](http://www.rescuedfilm.com/)

------
TomGullen
Great project, and fascinating to see them:
[http://www.rescuedfilm.com/#!rescuedwwii/c1d05](http://www.rescuedfilm.com/#!rescuedwwii/c1d05)

What I like about them is they are obviously taken by an amateur (I don't
profess to be any good myself!). Things like wonky horizon lines stand out to
me and help bring a bit more or a human connection to these photos and events
depicted I otherwise feel quite disconnected from.

They remind me of photos for example my family and friends take on holiday,
and make me realise it's just pure luck that it wasn't me, my family or
friends who found ourselves in those difficult years.

------
CamperBob2
Irony: Site called "petapixel.com" posts images in glorious 1989-era VGA
resolution.

As someone else mentioned, these images were basically stolen from
[http://www.rescuedfilm.com/](http://www.rescuedfilm.com/) , where they can be
viewed at higher quality.

------
markbnj
I've read about this project before. This isn't the first collection of film
from a soldier's belongings that he has located. The most melancholy thought,
for me, is that there is likely only one reason why the images were never
developed by their creator.

~~~
whizzkid
..Which makes the story more interesting actually. I wonder if he had had any
chance to write down his plan/thought of his journey while taking photos.
Another interesting part is, how they saved the rolls during the war, how it
is transferred back to USA..

~~~
yaddayadda
> how they saved the rolls during the war, how it is transferred back to USA

If he was killed or seriously injured in action, then any possessions he had
with him would have been returned to his family in the U.S.

~~~
markbnj
Exactly. There was one specific case I recall where a duffle was found in the
corner of an attic, unopened, and contained a soldier's belongins and a number
of film rolls. I could only imagine the emotions that had driven the person
who tossed the bag, unexamined, up into an attic and left it there for
decades.

------
userbinator
This makes me wonder if photos left on an SD card now would still be readable
in 70 years... considering the relative fragility of modern flash memory
(guaranteed retention specs are at less than a decade now), I'm not so
optimistic.

~~~
AshFurrow
The SD cards may hold the data that long, but I don't think it's likely that
it will be accessible. To computer enthusiasts with legacy hardware/software
_maybe_. I shoot on film and I know that even my negatives will eventually
fade. Photography has taught me to enjoy life because everything eventually
ends.

~~~
ars
> To computer enthusiasts with legacy hardware/software maybe.

All you need is one person that can access it. Do you know of any technology
that we can no longer access?

They are lots of great stories about the hard work people had to do to access
them (the video scans of the moon for example) but none that I know of that
failed.

~~~
pdardeau
> All you need is one person that can access it. Do you know of any technology
> that we can no longer access?

Technically, that's true. However, would it be economically feasible for the
average person with ordinary family photos?

------
jordanpg
The recovery of these images is a great story to be sure, but the WWII photos
remind me of the kind of photos that I usually take: terrible ones. Mostly
just pictures of uninspired landscapes, buildings, and nondescript groups of
people. Glad to know that ineptitude with a camera began long before they
became ubiquitous.

~~~
shawn-butler
The shot of the men at the railroad tracks waiting is universal.

Another 500 years will pass and soldiers will still be waiting in line for
something or other.

~~~
bdunbar
Waiting for chow, waiting for a range, waiting for the trucks to come back ..
and waiting .. and waiting .. but nobody told any _drivers_ they needed to
make a second run to pick up twenty marines and a small mountain of gear.

Then it started raining. Too bad the tents were in the first load.

------
coldtea
I think this is artistically fitting to the story:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNwC8ETa0pg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNwC8ETa0pg)

------
rquantz
Yay Hacker News. Top thread: what is the legality of who owns this film?
Second thread: debating the longevity of flash memory. Third thread (no
responses): direct link to content. Last thread (no replies): the only person
who directly engages with the content of the linked article even remotely.

~~~
wingerlang
I really don't understand these comments pointing this out. Generally these
"issues" tend to iron themselves out after some time. Now you could add "One
comment completely ignoring the topic at hand" (referring to your comment).

------
delinka
The overlapped images: are these simply because the film didn't wind a fill
frame?

Also: "Copyright of All Images On This Website is Owned By The Rescued Film
Project."

I have doubts about this statement. Can someone with more expertise in this
matter explain? It seems to me that the photographer holds the copyright
unless the copyright was properly transferred. Simple discovering the film and
processing it does not a copyright holder make.

EDIT: there form for donating unprocessed film contains the following: "By
donating your rescued film to The Rescued Film Project […] you agree to
release full print and publish copyright of all images recovered from the film
to The Rescued Film Project and it’s proprietor(s)."

This suggests to me that someone else may have obtained and donated the film
to TRFP.

~~~
jacquesm
> I have doubts about this statement. Can someone with more expertise in this
> matter explain? It seems to me that the photographer holds the copyright
> unless the copyright was properly transferred. Simple discovering the film
> and processing it does not a copyright holder make.

I'd say you are 100% in the right here, the problem will be to find the person
or their heirs to assert their claim.

I definitely do not think that finding the film is enough to stake a claim
this broad.

see: [http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-monkey-
self...](http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-monkey-selfie-
copyright-20140821-story.html)

Which has an interesting take on images with doubtful copyright status (selfie
taken by a monkey, owner of the camera tried to assert copyright).

Thinking about it a bit more, if the original maker of the images or their
heirs were to be nasty they could likely file for infringement of their
rights.

Personally I think what the guy did was great, they're amazing images but
asserting copyright goes one step too far. Maybe his argument is that by
buying the film he owns the rights?

Edit: another relevant bit:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivian_Maier](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivian_Maier)

Heading 'legal challenge'.

~~~
shawn-butler
False.

Copyright protection attaches to a work as soon as it is fixed in a tangible
medium by an author. Undeveloped film is arguably not a tangible medium
suitable for communication and this film is obviously not being developed by
its author. The development process of film renders it suitable for copy.

"A work is “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a
copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently
permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise
communicated for a period of more than transitory duration. A work consisting
of sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is “fixed” for
purposes of this title if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously
with its transmission." [0]

Also this would essentially be abandoned property. You can abandon copyright
just like any other property right. Trademarks can also similarly be
abandoned.

Would you claim that all the "abandonware" games still belong to their
original owners and deny people the right to use them as well?

[0]
[http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html](http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html)

~~~
trhway
>Copyright protection attaches to a work as soon as it is fixed in a tangible
medium by an author.

this is what photons do to silver on the film the moment you press the button
on the film based photo camera. This is why actual photographer has the
copyright. The fact that more light can destroy the image until it is
developed has the same effect on copyright as the fact that cassette recording
can be destroyed by magnetic field.

>Undeveloped film is arguably not a tangible medium suitable for communication
and this film is obviously not being developed by its author. The development
process of film renders it suitable for copy.

are you trying to say that Kodak development shops own copyright for 99% of
the photos made in the US in the second half of the 20th century?

~~~
shawn-butler
Irrelevant.

Copyright is about ensuring authors are paid for copies of their work being
disseminated.

You don't disseminate film. Copyright would cover negatives produced under an
authors direction in order to distribute his or her image.

Photographers "own" the film as property. It is a different legal standard.

~~~
trhway
Sounds like you saying that act of production of negative is where/when
copyright starts.

