What´s this pictures history?

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

I asked about the history behind a intersting picture...

What do you find interesting about the picture? The mouth...right?

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

That picture is not "intersting"

Oh, I beg to differ. Look at that guys mouth! He could fit his handgrenade in there, easily.

[AW1Steve]

[:D] He obviously was stifling a laugh cause he knew how staged the photo was going to be. [:D]

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

That picture is not "intersting", it's a poorly-made piece of propaganda. End of story.

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: Terminus

That picture is not "intersting"

Oh, I beg to differ. Look at that guys mouth! He could fit his handgrenade in there, easily.

I'll dispute this statement! (Only in the hope that Panzerjaeger replies with another picture of Ms. Portman [;)])

[Ike99]

That picture is not "intersting", it's a poorly-made piece of propaganda. End of story.

I guess that´s a matter of opinion Terminus. Obviously the marketing people at GMT games disagree with you on what pictures people find interesting as regards to the Pacific War.

So you don´t have any info, understood.

[mlees]

I have no "cite", but I think it is probably a staged photo as well.
 
In combat, you don't want to stand in between the two opposing forces to snap a picture.
 
Standing in the line of sight/line of fire violates the camera warranty.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

That picture is not "intersting", it's a poorly-made piece of propaganda. End of story.

I guess that´s a matter of opinion Terminus. Obviously the marketing people at GMT games disagree with you on what pictures people find interesting as regards to the Pacific War.

So you don´t have any info, understood.

Why not ask the people at GMT games - they would probably know...

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Ike99

That picture is not "intersting", it's a poorly-made piece of propaganda. End of story.

I guess that´s a matter of opinion Terminus. Obviously the marketing people at GMT games disagree with you on what pictures people find interesting as regards to the Pacific War.

So you don´t have any info, understood.

Why not ask the people at GMT games - they would probably know...

[:)] I'll bet you they don't , beyond the fact that it's not copyrighted. [:)]

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Ike99



I guess that´s a matter of opinion Terminus. Obviously the marketing people at GMT games disagree with you on what pictures people find interesting as regards to the Pacific War.

So you don´t have any info, understood.

Why not ask the people at GMT games - they would probably know...

[:)] I'll bet you they don't , beyond the fact that it's not copyrighted. [:)]

Oh, i dunno... the artist/art department (if they have one) might know where it came from.

[tocaff]

I'm surprised that a bit of a photo of a ship can be identified, but nothing on this picture.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: tocaff

I'm surprised that a bit of a photo of a ship can be identified, but nothing on this picture.

We can all make guesses, and one of them might be correct, but who is to know?? In the ship photo ID contests, people guess at things all the time.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: tocaff

I'm surprised that a bit of a photo of a ship can be identified, but nothing on this picture.

We can all make guesses, and one of them might be correct, but who is to know?? In the ship photo ID contests, people guess at things all the time.

[:)]The majority of the ship contests are allied ships , and the photo's have been documented. Having spent hundreds of hours looking at thousands of wartime photo's for three different museums , I can tell you that about 85% of undocumented photo's get a great big ? on the back. You can ID uniforms,weapons , geo features and sometimes even people to get an approximate time , but often that's about it. Propaganda photo's (unless you have original document -copy of the magazine it appeared in , etc) are a real pain as they are more likely to be using prop's vice real items. This one obviously was staged , but better than most. Uniforms , weapons and props (US flag on ground) appear to be real , current with the time period , and correctly worn. I'm guessing the explosion was done by theatrical people vice military , as military people of the time period knew how to blow things up (and pepper them with shrapnel) not give good special effects. (Today they do , but largely to make training more acurrate , rather than stage propaganda). So other than the fact it was staged early in the war , pre 1943 , professionally done by a film studio , there is not much I can tell you from this print. And I'll bet every one who reads this forum could tell you the same thing. [:)]

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

... Many pictures looked staged that are not. Flag raising of Iwo Jima for example.

Honestly, in additon to the actual flag raising shot at Iwo, Rosenthal also took a staged photo afterward, but it was because he didn't think he captured the original and didn't want to return back down the mountain empty-handed.

There was also a controversy w/Rosenthal's "real" photo and another taken of the first flag raising w/a smaller flag by another photographer, who I believe worked for Leatherneck magazine. I recall Rosenthal worked for the AP.

Again, your photo is too interesting, and whomever took it had the presence of mind to turn the camera on its end and take a portrait shot -- instead of the typical landscape angle -- which usu. doesn't happen in actual combat.

This photo could have been a promotional still for an IJ WW II propaganda film, although its "portrait" orientation couldn't have come from a frame of a movie.

Ike, when you first found this photo, was there any (relevant) text that went w/it?

[Snowman999]

Will that be modelled in AE?

Well played, sir! [;)]

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Ike99

... Many pictures looked staged that are not. Flag raising of Iwo Jima for example.

Honestly, in additon to the actual flag raising shot at Iwo, Rosenthal also took a staged photo afterward, but it was because he didn't think he captured the original and didn't want to return back down the mountain empty-handed.

There was also a controversy w/Rosenthal's "real" photo and another taken of the first flag raising w/a smaller flag by another photographer, who I believe worked for Leatherneck magazine. I recall Rosenthal worked for the AP.

i hadn't heard that before, although i had heard he had taken a picture of a bunch of guys posing for a photo (a kind of unit shot) on the same roll of film ... according to an interview i read (many years ago).

He had an inquiry of "was that photo staged?" and he thought they were talking about the group photo, and so replied "yes" - and this started the "the photo was staged" business.

[Cap Mandrake]

That is Toshiro Mifune on the right..he is sucking in his lower lip for dramatic effect.


I think the other guy is a guy I knew in high school named Alan Hata. I am pretty sure he had Asperger's syndrome. If that were a real artillery round going off behind Alan, he would already be peppered (if not sawn in half) with shrapnel. I bet he got Toshiro's autograph.

Here is Toshiro's picture. I can't find one for Alan.

[AW1Steve]

I don't think so!

[ChezDaJez]

So in other words you don´t know either and should just shut the F up.

Yeah I´m starting to agree with some other posters and believe the Matrix forums are better left to the Yankees, their propaganda and their unique sense of insecurity.

My, oh my...

You asked for comments... you got them. And they explained (Joe D in particular) that the photo was probably staged.

Then you turn and around tell everyone that they don't know what they are talking about and to "shut the F up!". Then you try to blame your dislike of the answers on the Yankees. Dude, you probably didn't notice because of your own bias but at least half of the posters who answered your question aren't from America.

Chez

[Hortlund]

I have found some answers!!


After googling "the biggest mouth in the history of the world" and variations on that theme, I found this.



As you can see, the similarities are too obvious to ignore.

Here the mystery thickens though, as the image I found is a drawing from the 15th century. Can it be that we have stumbled upon evidence of some Japanese version of the Philadelphia experiment? Is the mouth big enough to have its own gravitational field, and this somehow disrupts the time/space continuum, and a wormhole was opened between 15th century Europe and a Japanese propaganda photo-studio in 1943? More questions...can we find the answers?