WWII colour images

[Eric Rose]

These are original colour images, not retouched or coloured in post.

http://edition.cnn.com/style/articl...t/dam/assets/171016145928---iwm-tr-000453.jpg

 

[railwayman3]

Very interesting. I would suggest probably taken on Kodachrome.....I've read that it was used quite a lot during WW2 (apparently there was even a Kodachrome lab in Berlin up to the time the US entered the war?), but that most photos and newsreel film were originally published in B&W at the time (even if take in color) simply because of the cost, time and complications of color reproduction, which would have been unnecessary and impractical in wartime conditions,

 

[AgX]

"Only about 3,000 images were taken in total."

In Germany colour photography was considered of greater importance for the propaganda units. It was to be used where colour was decisive for the photograph, and only then. These units belonged to the few who were supplied with colour films. With cine stock for foreign colour editions of the weekly newsreel, and with still films mainly for a bi-weekly all-colour foreign magazin that had editions in many languages ( a Life version by the Wehrmacht).
Yes, Kodachrome was available in the early years of the war. It is not clear to what extent it was allocated.

 

[GRHazelton]

Somewhere I saw a post of Kodachrome 4 x 5 shots taken in WW II defense plants in the US. They were wonderful! Taken by an expert, well lighted, etc. The pix above might have been medium format, certainly that would have been more likely for the Montgomery and King George shot. There were many color movie "gun camera" shots of aerial combat taken, I imagine, on Kodachrome. Somewhere I have a Photographer's Mate manual from the mid 50s. It deals with the Medalist and Graphic 4 x 5, I don't remember whether it discusses color film.

 

[hoffy]

I was going to say "oh, the ones that we have all seen 1000 x's before, of the women working in the Aircraft Factory", but I have to admit I had't seen most of these.

Thanks for sharing. These are great!

 

[Louis Nargi]

Great pictures Thanks for showing them

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thank you

 

[RattyMouse]

Very interesting. I would suggest probably taken on Kodachrome....

It says right in the article, "The images were commissioned by the British Ministry of Information, which got hold of a very small quantity of Kodachrome film."

 

[1kgcoffee]

Better than portra in my opinion. Like portra and velvia had a baby.

 

[AgX]

None of these are actual fighting scenes and by this with some ease large-fomats could have been used*, and likely were. Kodachrome was available as sheet film, modern Agfacolor only in 35mm, Also it are the allied photographs that mostly have survived the war. All this has to be taken into account when evaluating military WWII photography.


* to be fair: a Graflex was even a standard camera for US Army photographers

 

[pentaxuser]

Excellent colour. Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Svenedin]

Thank you very much for posting those. Amazing images to see in colour. I was particularly interested to see the hospital patients outside in Summer in the sunshine and the Avro factory in Manchester. There were some ghost images in the factory shot suggesting it was a long exposure which also seems to have caused rather washed out colour. King George VI being briefed by Monty and the Ace Spitfire pilot complete with black lab are also excellent. It is a (still current) military joke that black labradors are issued in stores to officers and have a NATO serial number on them.

 

[BMbikerider]

What I find surprising, especially in the crowded street scenes that they all appear to be sharp. Considering the film was almost certainly the original Kodachrome with a speed of 10 ISO and the shot inside the Dakota with the Paratroops. it is obviously flash but the quality is simply outstanding.

 

[resummerfield]

Thanks for posting these, Eric. Interesting images!