
Norwegian Student Takes Secret Street Photos In The 1890s - kposehn
https://www.boredpanda.com/spy-camera-secret-street-photography-carl-stormer-norway/
======
thomasfl
The fellow with the round glasses is and a moustache, is physics professor
Kristian Birkeland. While working on an electric cannon he had invented, he
came up with a theory that could explain the northern lights (stella
borealis). The photographer himself and professor Birkeland went on
expeditions together in the arctic parts of norway. Few believed in
Birkeland’s theories, until modern satelites proved he was actually right and
it’s electromagnetic.

To me it seems like some of the young women liked the photographer. Some of my
ancestors lived in Oslo at that time, and could be present in some of the
photos. As an inhabitant of Oslo myself, these photos are a real gem.

------
rrauenza
Here's a little more on the camera:

[https://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/16/alexiadis-vest-
pocket...](https://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/16/alexiadis-vest-pocket-spy-
camera-would-have-intrigued-sherlock-holmes/)

 _The photographer would wear the 6-inch diameter chrome camera under his
vest. The lens would poke out a buttonhole, and the shutter could be tripped
by pulling a cord. The camera could shoot six images on a circular dry plate;
the photographer would advance the plate by patting his chest to activate a
lever. [...] The camera, which retailed at $15, was popular among amateurs and
professionals alike._

I didn't realize exposure times of film were short enough to get snapshots
like this in the 1880's.

According to
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_photography_techno...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_photography_technology),
this change was in 1878: _Heat ripening of gelatin emulsions is discovered.
This greatly increases sensitivity and makes possible very short "snapshot"
exposures._

edit:

Also, $15 is about $400 now: [http://www.in2013dollars.com/1890-dollars-
in-2018?amount=15](http://www.in2013dollars.com/1890-dollars-
in-2018?amount=15)

~~~
josephjrobison
Kinda odd that in 2018, these types of buttonhole cameras aren't super easy to
find. I mean they have them on spy gear websites, and we all have phones, and
there was Google Glass, but nothing super cool that's an obvious choice.

~~~
pavel_lishin
The Narrative Clip is similar - the Clip 2 sells for about $200, which isn't
too far off from the adjusted price. It's not branded as a spy camera, but
looks pretty discreet.

------
ryeguy_24
I just figured out why I think these photos are so interesting. I thought
about these photos all day and couldn’t stop wondering why.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an old photo of people that weren’t posing.
I feel like these photos are a magical window into life back then. It’s so
amazing and eerie at the same time. Look at them tip their hats to greet the
man. Look at these people walking down the street, petting their cats, and
enjoying life. But yet they are all gone and don’t know how the world changed.
Amazing.

~~~
317070
Look at how clean those streets are! Is there someone from Oslo who can
comment on these streets now? Are they still as clean (because they're in the
political district?) or did we make our cities more dirty since then?

~~~
anyfoo
Are you American? Streets in plenty of European cities still look like that.

~~~
317070
London based now, but in Belgium they sure didnt. And I visited Stockholm and
Alesund but didnt notice such cleanliness.

~~~
GFischer
In Vienna they did. And the joke goes that the Swiss say the Austrians are
dirty :P

------
twic
If you like blurry old candid photos of people about town, you might be
interested in the work of Miroslav Tichý, who from the '60s to the '80s made
his own cameras, that were so rubbish they didn't look real, so people didn't
behave as if they were being photographed [1]:

[https://fstoppers.com/natural-light/photographer-snaps-
nearl...](https://fstoppers.com/natural-light/photographer-snaps-nearly-
hundred-photos-day-homemade-camera-4848)

[http://uk.phaidon.com/agenda/photography/articles/2013/febru...](http://uk.phaidon.com/agenda/photography/articles/2013/february/25/miroslav-
tich-show-uncovers-unseen-images/)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Tich%C3%BD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Tich%C3%BD)

[1] maybe

~~~
m-localhost
Tichy is one of a kind. Such an interesting person (or maybe just a creep ^^)

------
dangerboysteve
It's actually nice to see people smiling in these old photos. Something that
was absent in posed photos of those days.

~~~
fyfy18
I was thinking the same. I wonder if he knew them or they are strangers. I
grew up in a village and if you saw someone, even if you didn't know them
(although you knew most people), you'd say hello, but it's strange to imagine
that happening in a city today.

~~~
woodpanel
Looking at the pictures it seems that they were taken exactly in the moment of
greeting the photographer (People with their hands on hats...). The way the
function of the camera is described, using the gestures of greeting someone
may have nicely helped in keeping his camera a secret.

Also: Indeed, very nice to see people smiling in that time! I wonder how much
the grim-looking portraits we know add to the cliche of hard-ship and sadness
we have of earlier times.

Then, having to look that way when being portrayed may stemmed from who were
the earliest people being portrayed: Saints, Kings and Queens.

~~~
mikestew
_Then, having to look that way when being portrayed may stemmed from who were
the earliest people being portrayed: Saints, Kings and Queens._

That certainly might have contributed to the lack of smiling, yes. From
sources I have long since lost, it is my understanding that portraits were
expensive, and photographs were serious business. Add to that the fact
of...umm, why do we smile for photographs again? I do it because everyone else
does. Build a time machine, and someone from the 1800s is going to ask, "why
does everyone in your photographs look like a smiling idiot? Was there a rash
of some brain-eating disease in your time?" I've also heard the theory based
on exposure times, but by the very late 1800s exposure times had dropped
dramatically. Though it could be argued that not smiling was a carry-over from
the days of long exposure. Again, though, documentation I've seen simply said,
"that's just how it was done".

Fashions change, just like we don't wear corsets anymore (well, I don't; but I
don't judge), now we smile for pictures.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> I've also heard the theory based on exposure times, but by the very late
> 1800s exposure times had dropped dramatically. Though it could be argued
> that not smiling was a carry-over from the days of long exposure. Again,
> though, documentation I've seen simply said, "that's just how it was done".

Presumably photographic portraits were done in the style of painted portraits.

~~~
mikestew
Hmm, so maybe it _is_ a result of "exposure time". Dunno about you, but I sure
can't keep a smile on my face for a few hours while Leonardo does me in oil.
(Err, wait, that didn't come out right...)

Despite any documentation, I think it's just a matter of asking for an answer
to a negative action. "Why didn't you smile for your photographs back then?"

"Same reason we didn't do a handstand: why would we?"

------
JasonFruit
There are 33 photos from him at
[https://imgur.com/a/Eplvs](https://imgur.com/a/Eplvs). Several look as though
the subject is aware of the camera, and at least a couple don't look pleased
about it.

~~~
taneq
I'm amazed that no one seems to think it's creepy. Go around taking covert
photos of strangers these days and see how people react...

~~~
megy
It is in public. And if you sneakily take a photo of someone, how would they
know to react? On top of that, there are cameras everywhere in public taking
covert photos of everyone, I haven't seen anyone react to it.

~~~
taneq
They're portraits, not wide angle crowd shots (and yes, the law distinguishes
between the two, for privacy and copyright purposes). And the people reacting
are the ones you told that you were taking sneaky photos, not the subjects of
the photos (although if they did pick it, they also might not be pleased -
FTFA: "This is physics professor Kristian Birkeland - the only one of
Størmer's subjects to rumble him. Apparently he got quite cross!").

Try taking a bunch of covert photos then showing your friends: "Hey look at
these photos I took of people with my spy cam!" I guarantee the reaction won't
be entirely positive.

------
kogus
I always marvel at both the differences and the similarities between pictures
like these and today. I hope someone over at
[https://www.reddit.com/r/ColorizedHistory/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ColorizedHistory/)
takes a crack at some of these.

------
FredrikMeyer
His grandson is actually a mathematics professor at my university:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erling_St%C3%B8rmer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erling_St%C3%B8rmer)
Really funny and amicable guy.

------
maho
Whenever I see pictures from the pre-WW1-era I marvel at the shoes people wore
back then. From the outside they appear comfortable, sturdy, and elegant. I
wonder which would be more comfortable to wear -- hand-made, customized shoes
from a 1900's-inspired, experienced shoemaker, or modern, mass-produced
sneakers (which are pretty comfortable to begin with).

~~~
bcaulfield
Yes, and the clothes. Okay, I know by many statistical measures we're
wealthier now. But those clothes would cost a fortune now. Do they have fewer
outfits? Are we only seeing the elite?

~~~
jacquesm
My grandfather was a tailor, and ended up employing a 100 people or so. Tailor
made clothing was the norm, rather than the exception for anybody of moderate
means and just about everybody that could afford it had a sewing machine or
knew how to use one. Sewing machines were common wedding gifts, and were the
equivalent in money of a small car today. Fabrics were of far better quality
than the ones we have today and repairing stuff rather than throwing it away
was normal. Fashion was as much a thing back then as it is now.

~~~
ddalex
I grew up in a house that still has a sewing machine. My grandmother knew how
to use it, and my father does too - he still repairs some old pieces from time
to time, but never touches anything made of newer fabrics, he says there is
nothing that he can mend there. Funny thing, he's a civil engineer.

------
caio1982
What/where is the location of the (third) picture with two ladies and a very
curvy street? That looks like an optical illusion of sort given his POV, or is
the street really as curvy and as steep as that? Beautiful shot that one.

~~~
jaclaz
Victoria Terrace (Terrasse), Oslo.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Terrasse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Terrasse)

It doesn't seem particularly stretched by a "fish-eye" effect, all vertical
lines of the buildings remain vertical, it is just a particular effect of the
perspective, compare with:

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4d/Os...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4d/Oslo._Victoria_terasse_-
_NB_MS_G4_0396.jpg/500px-Oslo._Victoria_terasse_-_NB_MS_G4_0396.jpg)

[https://lokalhistoriewiki.no/wiki/Fil:70._Christiania,_Victo...](https://lokalhistoriewiki.no/wiki/Fil:70._Christiania,_Victoria_Terrasse,_1892_-_NB_bldsa_AL0070.jpg)

[http://www.enerhaugen.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Oslo-
Vi...](http://www.enerhaugen.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Oslo-Victoria-
terrasse-_-resampled_greyscale.jpg)

Ok, found one similar:
[https://www.vartoslo.no/media/uploads/2017/06/Victoria-
terra...](https://www.vartoslo.no/media/uploads/2017/06/Victoria-terrasse.jpg)

------
aresant
For the Bay Area contingent, a similar series of candid photographs taken by
Walker Evans in the 1940s - 60s is one of the current MOMA exhibitions if
you're looking for an excuse

------
WalterBright
These photos are a treasure.

It's remarkable how elegantly dressed everyone was, even the children.

~~~
ekianjo
They are elegant because they are probably from the local bourgeoisie. Go out
of the city center and I would bet clothes would look way worse than that. It
was probably a minority who could afford to dress like that.

~~~
cjmoran
Or who could afford a $15 camera like that. ($400 in today's money based on
another comment)

------
rebuilder
Nice pictures. But... what happened to using img size tags? The page is very
hostile to the viewer since if you start browsing the pictures, it keeps
adding photo elements as they load, making it impossible to actually read
anything or view the photos until all the images have loaded. Seems to happen
a lot to me these days.

edit: I should note, the article now links to a better-behaved site.

~~~
johansch
People generally caring about declaring img size attributes died out like 15
years ago. _grumble_

Declaring image sizes doesn't fit into the distributed model that is that is
the rage these days, so I guess people don't care since it's so _hard_. At
least it makes their ms/req numbers look great, nevermind that the experience
for the actual users sucks.

------
exabrial
I wish people still wore suits all the time

~~~
rublev
I sort of want to start but don't want to deal with the explaining. My buddy
started with the nice leather briefcase and he got relentlessly roasted in
college.

~~~
AlecSchueler
I've worn a suit almost every day for the past 3 years, no one really mentions
it. Looks perfectly casual depending on the tie and jacket you pick. Natural
materials for ties somehow look less formal I've found.

------
dghughes
> I had a string down through a hole in my trouser pocket, and when I pulled
> the string the camera took a photo

It makes me wonder how obvious it was when he yanked on the string in his
pocket.

~~~
pvaldes
And there is the noise also

------
d3sandoval
Clicked the article thinking maybe a Norwegian Google Streetview competitor
had invented time travel... Was still worth the read! Was not disappointed.

------
grawprog
I always really like old photographs of everyday life. It's always amazing how
different but still similar life was.

------
agoodthrowaway
Is it me or was his original motivation to take a photo of a woman he was
sweet on without her knowing kind of creepy?

------
ForFreedom
Did not know they could take pics with quick shutter speeds, theres barely any
blur in movement.

------
digi_owl
The more that changes the more it stays the same.

------
ksherlock
Original page, with more pictures, including a (modern) picture of the camera
itself - [https://www.boredpanda.com/spy-camera-secret-street-
photogra...](https://www.boredpanda.com/spy-camera-secret-street-photography-
carl-stormer-norway/)

~~~
toyg
Not that "secretly" taken: one of the subjects is indicating the camera, and
most subjects are also looking straight at it.

More like "unauthorizedly" taken.

~~~
Digory
It looks to arouse the same response you might get from Google Glass.

When approached by a young man with a camera lens sticking out of his jacket,
younger subjects seem to be amused; some of the older subjects are not.

------
robertelder
I visited this page two times and it caused my browser to download a file
called 'n5hm6dsspmjfor3d5akscs.gz' and then another called
'rblsat02tsnsr899bpjig2.gz'.

~~~
toyg
Same. I want to be charitable and believe some content-compressing mechanism
was misconfigured. Who would ever distribute a virus as ".gz"?

------
stuaxo
WTH, as I scroll down the page I get loads of dialogues saying firefox has
downloaded different cryptically named gzip files.

~~~
dang
Url since changed; see
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16053599](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16053599).

------
kposehn
OP here - apologies all, looks like this should have been the BoredPanda url
in retrospect. Funny enough, I thought BoredPanda was a social click farm by
the name and when I went to MyModernMet I had no issues.

@Mods can we change the link to: [https://www.boredpanda.com/spy-camera-
secret-street-photogra...](https://www.boredpanda.com/spy-camera-secret-
street-photography-carl-stormer-norway/)

