• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Charles and Irene Custer— Route 66, 1950

Latest Gallery

Somewhere...

D
Somewhere...

  • 2
  • 1
  • 63
Iriana

H
Iriana

  • 6
  • 1
  • 123

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,740
Messages
2,844,933
Members
101,493
Latest member
aekatz
Recent bookmarks
0
David A. Goldfarb

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
20,029
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Thank you. I enjoyed that.
 
Wow..... fabulous, simply fabulous....and Wonderful.!
The passing of time is often very kind to photography. :smile:
 
The article was clearly not written by a photographer. That’s not an “Agfa box camera.” Does anyone know what it is? It uses a Packard shutter and from the pull in the prints, a wide angle lens of some kind. Also the format of the prints is interesting. It appears they were shot on roll film, unless the company that “redeveloped” them finagled. I don’t recall sheet film having Kodak along the edges, but I didn’t shoot sheet film in the 50s.
 
The best part about that entire article is that there wasn't an electronic screen anywhere. No computers, no smartphones, no tv's... nothing. Just simple.

I was born in the wrong era.
 
Incredible work. Lots of things and styles I remember from my earliest years.

The photos really left me wondering about a lot of technical questions. Not just the camera used, but the lighting and the shutter speed/f stop combination to achieve such great depth of field, even illumination, and zero movement blur. He must have been quite a craftsman, but we'll probably never know.

Andy
 
ChristopherCoy said:
The best part about that entire article is that there wasn't an electronic screen anywhere. No computers, no smartphones, no tv's... nothing. Just simple.

I was born in the wrong era.
Click to expand...
As I recall, there wasn't much air conditioning, either. As a boy, I remember some businesses like the ones shown in the photos displayed signs saying "Air Conditioned Inside" - but few people had it at home.
 
runswithsizzers said:
As I recall, there wasn't much air conditioning, either. As a boy, I remember some businesses like the ones shown in the photos displayed signs saying "Air Conditioned Inside" - but few people had it at home.
Click to expand...

Probably wasn't as hot back then either. Less air pollution.
 
Thanks posting this David. I very much enjoyed the photos. The prose however...was really disappointing...on several levels.
RIP Mr. Custer.
 
I really enjoyed the article and amazed at the detail in the photos. A link in the article takes you a website with the full 150 images shot by Charles Custer. The film used was not medium format but probably Super XX sheet film. His obit says that they shot the pictures and then developed overnight and delivered 5x7 prints the next day. The film edge has two closely spaced V notches so it probably was Super XX but could be Royal Pan 4141 with a ISO of 400.
 
gordrob said:
I really enjoyed the article and amazed at the detail in the photos. A link in the article takes you a website with the full 150 images shot by Charles Custer. The film used was not medium format but probably Super XX sheet film. His obit says that they shot the pictures and then developed overnight and delivered 5x7 prints the next day. The film edge has two closely spaced V notches so it probably was Super XX but could be Royal Pan 4141 with a ISO of 400.
Click to expand...

Pictures of the 60s still tend to have some albeit tenuous resonance with today but this is an era that now looks from another world Sheet film would make a lot of sense. I could see how they might develop sheet film in a motel's sink with difficulty but not how they used an enlarger as well but 5x7 contact prints would be easier

pentaxuser
 
Small towns in NM occasionally retain that sort of look, especially in bars. I'm thinking about Pie Town, Tinnie, and isolated Spanish enclaves

Thanks for posting this!
 
I find the contents of the photos wonderful. I'm grateful for the work done in bringing them to our attention.
Is anyone else bothered by the post-processing - how the photos are "re-developed"?
I would love to see some of them printed more traditionally.
 
It wold be nice to see some 16x20 or larger prints from these 5x7 negatives printed in a darkroom rather than a digital reproduction
 
runswithsizzers said:
As I recall, there wasn't much air conditioning, either. As a boy, I remember some businesses like the ones shown in the photos displayed signs saying "Air Conditioned Inside" - but few people had it at home.
Click to expand...
I remember going to the movies which were air conditioned. We only had a fan at home until much later. You' open a window at one end of the apartment (in NYC), close the rest. Then turn on an exhaust fan in a window at the other end of the apartment to draw the air through the house. Of course, you were only pulling in hot, humid NYC air. But at least help evaporate the perspiration off of you. Boy those movies were a pleasure. You'd go for 25 cents and see two full length feature, 5 cartoons, a couple of shorts. Then go home again to sweat.
 
MattKing said:
I find the contents of the photos wonderful. I'm grateful for the work done in bringing them to our attention.
Is anyone else bothered by the post-processing - how the photos are "re-developed"?
I would love to see some of them printed more traditionally.
Click to expand...
I think the content is more important than the reproduction qualities.
 
Alan Edward Klein said:
I think the content is more important than the reproduction qualities.
Click to expand...
A valid point, Alan and what it has made me wonder about, is if these were taken today by almost anyone except the few who still use film as a recording medium would there be anything left to see in 70 yrs + from now?

pentaxuser
 
pentaxuser said:
A valid point, Alan and what it has made me wonder about, is if these were taken today by almost anyone except the few who still use film as a recording medium would there be anything left to see in 70 yrs + from now?

pentaxuser
Click to expand...
Well, photo books are still being printed. The NY Times has a photo essay section that covers many things. I'm sure they will maintain their files. Other publications as well. After all, there's no assurance that films, prints and negatives will be saved. They get lost and thrown out often by heirs who have no reason to save them.
 
MattKing said:
I find the contents of the photos wonderful. I'm grateful for the work done in bringing them to our attention.
Is anyone else bothered by the post-processing - how the photos are "re-developed"?
I would love to see some of them printed more traditionally.[/QUO

Why is the clarity of those images such a problem ? Prefer to see something Custer and his customers didn't see...or want ?
Click to expand...
 
gordrob said:
It wold be nice to see some 16x20 or larger prints from these 5x7 negatives printed in a darkroom rather than a digital reproduction
Click to expand...

Why ? In my city you can see mural sized display of images just like those in our wonderful art museum thanks to highly trained curators, archival storage, excellent aesthetics and scanning/printing, and generous contributions of original negatives of 3+ very successful historic Albuquerque studios.

IMO aesthetics and resonant history are far more important than the tastes of chat room fans.

Btw it's likely that those photos were lit by bare flash bulbs, but work just as effective was done throughout the region, 50 years earlier, with flash powder.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom