Appreciation of Lartigue

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,262
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Don_ih said:
The photo is from 1912.

View attachment 395911

I'm assuming a camera like an RBGraflex. Apparently, it was an ICA camera of some sort.
Click to expand...

I tried a number of times, but I have not been able to reproduce this result with my circa 1928 Graflex Model D.
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,498
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
koraks said:
Funny, I thought those came with leaf shutters generally. Did they make FP shutter models? I guess so!
Click to expand...

Could have been one like this:



but they made other focal plane shutter cameras (at least one that I saw).
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,498
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Sirius Glass said:
I tried a number of times, but I have not been able to reproduce this result with my circa 1928 Graflex Model D.
Click to expand...

A couple of considerations. First, you get the leaning wheels most easily by having the camera still and a slow shutter speed. So slow film.

And the wheel in that photo looks pretty big. I think the bigger the wheel, the more you'll see the effect.
 

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser
Advertiser
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
4,230
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
Format
Multi Format
bernard_L said:
... only partly true: JHL panned fast enough for the drivers, but not fast enough for the rear wheel (or the 6 numeral).
Click to expand...

Insert tongue into cheek:

So, obviously then, the axle is going faster than the car. As is the number "6." See, the explanation is simple.

Remove tongue...

The axle is going as fast as the car - and so the wheel outline, a circle, is going as fast as the car. The wheel outline is subject to the same FP shutter panning distortion as the rest of the car. That the wheel is turning is not relevant.

It may be there is a point of finesse where the drivers are lean backwards just enough so that when the distortion leans them forwards to the right they look upright? This explanation doesn't satisfy me, though.

I think I will just suspend disbelief and enjoy the photograph for what it is.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,507
Format
35mm RF


Another one by him
 

bernard_L

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,992
Format
Multi Format
Nicholas Lindan said:
Insert tongue into cheek:

So, obviously then, the axle is going faster than the car. As is the number "6." See, the explanation is simple.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm expected to be red in the face from this sarcasm. Except you should have read my post.
JHL was panning (not travelling) to follow the drivers. The rear wheel was traveling at the same linear speed as the drivers, but being closer to the camera, had an apparent angular motion (...)
Click to expand...

Maybe a little drawing will help. d=driver; w=wheel, c=camera. 1, 2: two successive instants while JHL is panning;
Note that d1d2 and w1w2 have the same length. Rest assured that wheel and driver travel at the same linear speed.
Nicholas Lindan said:
So, obviously then, the axle is going faster than the car.
Click to expand...
Not so obviously.

Now the wheel, as I already stated, is closer to the camera than the driver. So you can look-see on the diagram that the angular speed of displacement of the wheel (blue arc of circle) is larger than that of the driver (red arc of circle).

As a consequence, when JHL is panning to make the driver stationary in, his viewfinder, he sees the wheel, in the same viewfinder, moving to the right. (and obviously the bystanders are moving to the left in his viewfinder). Whence the opposite "rolling shutter effects" for resp. bystanders and rear wheel.

Nicholas Lindan said:
See, the explanation is simple.
Click to expand...

 

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser
Advertiser
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
4,230
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
Format
Multi Format
bernard_L said:
Maybe I'm expected to be red in the face from this sarcasm.
Click to expand...

It was meant as a bit of levity, not sarcasm - postulating that the axle is moving faster than the car.

It would be interesting to create the geometry to scale and see what the results are. Camera to car distance of 12', wheel to driver distance of 2', 1/10 second shutter traverse, 60mph car - just at a guess. Maybe I will fire up AutoCAD later... Obviously there is a geometric solution to the conundrum.
 
Last edited:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,262
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Don_ih said:
A couple of considerations. First, you get the leaning wheels most easily by having the camera still and a slow shutter speed. So slow film.

And the wheel in that photo looks pretty big. I think the bigger the wheel, the more you'll see the effect.
Click to expand...

The film was ISO 400, so that would explain my not being able to accomplish it.
 

Harry Callahan

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
454
Location
?
Format
Analog
The bystanders are leaning to the left, because the camera was moving to the right - there was relative movement between camera and bystanders.
The wheel is leaning to the right - because there also was relative movement between camera and car. If there hadn`t been relative movement between camera and car, the wheel wouldn`t lean to any side.
But there was relative movement between camera and car, because he was panning too slow. That`s probably also the reason for the car not being mid-frame, he was panning too slow and releasing too late to get the car mid-frame, undistorted.
This could be a blown shot.
As others explained the wheel was closer to the camera, therefore being distorted more, but still the car also must show distortion, so the number 6 actually should have been upright. The other wheel is even further away from the camera, therefore showing least distortion (but also still should have some dist.) .
 

djdister

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
49
Location
Maryland USA
Format
Multi Format
This was my attempt to try something similar by hand panning a Graflex Model B 5x7 camera (focal plane shutter) and a moving car...

 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,498
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Here's another example from his 1912 album, with less obvious distortion.



You can see the panning action in the tree leaning left and the vertical shutter effect in the wheels. The whole car appears to be leaning forward. I think this may be a crop from a larger negative. In the album, it is much smaller than the photo in the first post. Pretty sure he would've only been making contact prints in 1912.
 

Harry Callahan

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
454
Location
?
Format
Analog

Not sure whether here the camera was panned; the tree nearly is upright - and you don`t need to pan the camera to get distorted wheels/car.
Also it is easier to get a speeding race car with camera on tripod and release when the car is before the tree - instead of trying to pan and follow the car with the viewfinder. He may have been using the tree as reference for when to push the button.
snusmumriken said:
I can’t get my head around why the wheel spokes are (almost) sharp.
Click to expand...

The outside of the wheel, the tire, moves fastest - the axis moves slowest. It`s like with a record player, the outside of the record has biggest diameter and therefore travels greater distance than the label or the center hole.
That`s why the spokes close to the axis are pretty sharp, but get less sharp the closer to the tire. Apart from that a focal plane shutter also might contribute to that... but i`m not sure.
But with a focal plane shutter the spokes also should bent in a circular pattern.
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,498
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
I agree with koraks. I think there panning was at much lower speed, due to the distance from the car. And it was probably on a tripod but it might be noteworthy that tripods, at that time, were not made for panning a camera.
 

Harry Callahan

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
454
Location
?
Format
Analog
I needed a sharper version of this picture to really be sure... at least he panned a lot slower than in the first picture.
 

Harry Callahan

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
454
Location
?
Format
Analog
I mean there is visible pixelation on the writing under the picture... therefore i assume it could be obtainable a bit sharper.
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,498
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Harry Callahan said:
I mean there is visible pixelation on the writing under the picture... therefore i assume it could be obtainable a bit sharper.
Click to expand...

It's from the Lartigue site - a screenshot of one of the albums. Unless there is another online source, this is as good as it gets. And I doubt there is another online source. The photo is also small.
 

Rod Klukas

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
47
Location
mesa, AZ
Format
Multi Format
Don_ih said:
The photo is from 1912.

View attachment 395911

I'm assuming a camera like an RBGraflex. Apparently, it was an ICA camera of some sort.
Click to expand...
There was no Leica Camera until 1925 available. Yes this was an RB Graflex type. He used these but also a 5x7 camera. The shutter is similar to a Speed Graphic, in that a slit passes across the film
to make the exposure. The shutter was not set fast enough to allow a global exposure of the film.

Today this has a similarity to rolling shutter on a Digital sensor.

His photographs of French Society women in Paris and the large number of photographs of his crazy brother, who flew gliders, and raced boats, among his experiments, are also excellent.

See attached Graflex manual". Dropbox Link: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/vzh4...nual.pdf?rlkey=fat252rrrt8gewhje10lquxro&dl=0


Hope this helps.

Rod
 

nikos79

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2025
Messages
352
Location
Lausanne
Format
35mm
Just another note on Larrigue: I prefer 1000 times his photos of the Parisian bel air, that at least had something personal than all the contemporary photos I see on Instagram that all look the same (childish games with shadows and lights, folklore snapshots of random boring street life, chaos and noise with some extra sauce of clarity + dehaze filter
 
OP
OP

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,507
Format
35mm RF
Don_ih said:
I agree with koraks. I think there panning was at much lower speed, due to the distance from the car. And it was probably on a tripod but it might be noteworthy that tripods, at that time, were not made for panning a camera.
Click to expand...

I also think the panning was at a lower speed, but I don't think he used a tripod for this shot. In general, he was not that sort of a set up/gear photographer. He was more of the instant reaction school.

​

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…