Strange Picture

This pic was originally posted on the Coast To Coast AM website by Jean Gallivan stating:

"I found this picture at a local thrift store in Tonawanda, NY. I like old photos and thought this one was pretty cool, and kind of creepy. But as I took a closer look I saw that the four men in the photo are actually the same man."

It appears thats she right as 2 out of the 4 have the same hair cut and all four have the same tie and shirt, but what gets me is the clothing all seem to be from different regions if not eras.

What do you think?

what do i think?

Ye olde worldy doubley exposurey. (or quadrubbley)

Dude was obviously a photographer. Posing in front of the darkened barn opening allowed him to access a primitive form of green screening. This let him expose himself multiple times on a single sheet of film without excessive bleed through as you see in the lower portion of the picture which was more well lighted.

[edit on 3-18-2008 by groingrinder]

Great picture!

My dad use to do camera tricks like this. Holding up a car with one hand stuff.

Considering you can't see the lower half of the legs on either figures, its a safe bet this guy like to double and even quadruple expose his film.

reply to post by 168.56.255.255

---

Cool picture.

You know, this kind of "tricks" - they weren't really intended to trick anyone, mind you - was the rage in the early days of popular (= widespread) photography. Think of it as an experiment by an avid photographer trying to expand his skills.

As to the clothing: I don't really see them as being from different periods (I am not familiar with the fashions of the space/time in question), but I can tell you that, in rural areas, "incoherent" dressing, i.e. combining clothing from different periods and even belonging to different people - I like to call it "magpie fashion" - was actually the rule. People made do with whatever they had in their family trunk. Men and women usually had a single "nice" dress or suit, to be worn in church and to other festivities. And men, especially, borrowed clothing from other members of their family who weren't using it at the time.

It wasn't poverty (not necessarily): it's just that "fashion" did not apply in rural areas.
(And why would it?)







[edit on 18-3-2008 by Vanitas]

How come you dont see any evidence of movement?

No blurred lines or anything.

Can someone explain how to do this technique or come up with other pictures like it?