Slashdot Mirror


19th-Century Photographer Captured 5,000 Snowflakes

tcd004 writes "Wilson Bentley began photographing snowflakes in 1885, and managed to immortalize more than 5,000 crystals before his death in 1931. Now his images are widely recognized and highly sought after. At the age of 19, 'Snowflake' Bentley jury-rigged a microscope to a bulky bellows camera and took the first-ever photograph of a snowflake. Photography then, particularly microphotography, was much closer to science than art. In a 1910 article published in the journal Technical World, he wrote, 'Here is a gem bestrewn realm of nature possessing the charm of mystery, of the unknown, sure richly to reward the investigator." The video embedded at the link above touches on another long-forgotten piece of history: a sketch of the photographers who captured arial views of assemblages of tens of thousands of soldiers returning from WW-I, carefully choreographed and arranged to form a Liberty Bell, a Stature of Liberty, a US flag... as forgotten as the origin of the WW-I term razzle-dazzle.

11 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Arial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ariel: A character in "The Tempest". Also "The Little Mermaid".
    Aerial: existing or living or growing or operating in the air
    Arial: A font from Monotype.

  2. Public Domain by Skapare · · Score: 5, Informative

    Follow the "snowflakes" link and look at the bottom of the page:

    Copyright/Public domain works
    Wilson Bentley did not copyright his photographs and thus they are in the public domain and free to use for any purpose.
    HOWEVER
    No materials or images from this (or any other) website may be resold in any form (print or electronic).
    The Public Domain status does not give you the right to resell material unless you have access to the original source and permission from the owner to reproduce the material. Any published works of Public Domain material is only "Royalty free" if explicitly stated.

    WTF? Someone just doesn't understand what Public Domain really is.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Public Domain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      (Sigh) Bridgeman v. Corel says otherwise.

    2. Re:Public Domain by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't see why a still from the movie that consists of nothing except a verbatim copy of the original photograph wouldn't be in the public domain. If the movie itself has creative arrangement it may be copyrightable as a work, but that doesn't mean that any subsidiary parts of the movie that were drawn from the public domain magically get a new copyright as part of the new work.

      For example, if I quote a public-domain poem in a new novel, the entire work (novel+poem) is copyrighted, but anyone may extract that poem from my novel and use it without my permission.

  3. Re:Bring forth ye Olde English Grammar Nazis by biryokumaru · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not a grammar note, but this link to the human Statue of Liberty thing would've been nice to include.

    --
    When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
  4. Dazzle Camouflage by AtomicSnarl · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those wondering how wild colors and stripes on ships would hide them from U-Boats -- it didn't. It made it hard for the U-Boat captains to properly evaluate their targets. The colors and pattern would disrupt the length, angle, and speed clues seen though binoculars at a distance, and through the periscope when preparing to fire torpedoes.

    Radar didn't exist during WWI, so U-Boats cruised on the surface with lookouts who could eyeball ships or ship smoke at 10 miles, maybe 20 on a good day. Given their 15-18 knot surface speed and 6-8 knot submerged speed, the U-Boat now had only 30 minutes or so to get into proper position ahead of the approaching ship -- about 4000-6000 yards (2-3 nautical miles) ahead and to one side of the approaching target. WWI German torpedoes could travel 6600 yards at 36 knots, for a max run time of just over 5 minutes. A target ship moving at 12 knots would move 400 yards in a minute. A 600 foot ship travels it's length in only 30 seconds. It's this tiny window that the Razzle-Dazzle would screw up. If the U-Boat captain guessed wrong on the ships movement due to painted false bow waves and extra bow/stern lines, the firing solution would be bad.

    Remember that the ship view from the U-Boat was usually against cloudy skies of some sort in the North Atlantic. Add in the blue haze with distance, and the yellows, purples, and pinks start to blur into the background blue-gray sky. Now think of that sight through a wet periscope a few feet above the water, and you get the idea.

    WWII had a brilliant camoufalge example in the bizarre sounding Pink Spitfires used for reconnaissance. The pink shade was selected to blend against the just-past-sunset twilight sky and clouds when those aircraft flew, and it was very effective.

    --
    Pacifist paratroopers yell, "Ghandi!" when they jump.
    1. Re:Dazzle Camouflage by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Informative

      Correct. However the link in the summary is incorrect - dazzle camouflage was widely used in WWII. Some of the schemes used by the USN can be seen here.
       
      It's worth pointing out however that proper studies of the effectiveness of dazzle camouflage seem to have never been carried out.

  5. Off topic by electrosoccertux · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm wondering who this advertiser thinks they're going to make money off of here at slashdot.
    Just saw it to the right of the /. homepage.

  6. Shame they don't show the photographs. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would have been nice to see how they looked.

    1. Re:Shame they don't show the photographs. by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting
      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  7. Re:As good as the shoulder's I've stood on before? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think he's trying to reference Newton's statement "If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

    I can see where he got confused; Galileo was in fact one of the "giants" Newton was referencing in the quote (Kepler was another). The great thing about that quote is that it's actually a stealth insult. Newton wrote it to a rival named Robert Hooke, who was somewhat, um, short. That exact wording is Newton's, and it is the best known expression of the thought, but the metaphor predates Newton considerably; the earliest known example of it was by Bernard of Chartres around 1130, and it was commonly used throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance.