Depth of field and focal plane

[Brian Ellis]

Based on the lighting technique and that it is LF B&W my first thought was 50s but I was under the impression the miniskirts were not around until the late 60s. I'm guessing 66 to 72 or so. College yearbook shot of the women's golf team? In the 70s most yearbooks were still done in B&W, whereas most commercial imagery was color.

I don't think it's a golf team, too many players for one team. A group of teams maybe but it would be very unusual to see such uniformly good looking women on several golf teams all at the same place and time. I'm thinking more and more that it was a fashion shot of some kind. But the dates sound about right.

[rguinter]

The haircuts suggest the 1950s. Would be difficult to find that many attractive young women from the mid 60s on wearing their hair like that. Bob G.

[sultanofcognac]

To me, the gloves and wristbands are the only thing that is exact on all models. They have many different shoe types and there are sets of like sweaters and skirts. In my opinion, neither the clubs nor hairstyles can date a photograph. Short skirts for sports were around in the 50s, but also in 2010.

We, as photographers, capture images that express what we see or feel or want others to believe. Trying to date this photo without more information is probably exactly what the photographer wants (and rightly so).

How about that 'stand' out to the left? Were those common on golf courses in the 50s/60s?

The one thing that dates this image for me is the girls' knees. How many pairs of knobby knees can one find today on both sports women and models? Rather difficult, I'd say. The girls are nice enough but posture is reminiscent of the 50/60 time frame.
Especially on the sparkly-eyed front liner. Hairdos are the easiest to 'fake'.

Someone told #1 how to hold the club and to stand - the second and third have clubs that seem to be too short.

The photographer doesn't seem to have his/her schtuff in one bag, as the posing literally sux, with #4 (with only one leg) peeking around #3, #11 positively bent in half and #12 almost not visible. If one is to take the time to set this up then I'd assume the photog would have ensured the lineup works with all models visible… #s 1 and 2 are too close to the fill light (oh, I could go on).

I think this wasn't the money shot and someone just posted a non-salable version.

But it is certainly pleasing to look at, and look at how much chatter it generated

Wish that were one of MY shots - as I'd definitely have a few phone numbers

[Lon Overacker]

But it is certainly pleasing to look at, and look at how much chatter it generated

I don't know why, but somehow this image has been intriguing enough to progress from large format techniques to dating the image.... even got me wasting a few extra minutes to gather some additional clues.

Brian may be on to something about the early 70's. Two clues. I did an image search with "tineye.com" and it found this image used 1 other time. See here. It's a very tiny thumbnail and you can't read the bi-line in red below, but the sayings reflect the times of Helen Ready's song "I am Woman" introduced in '72 or '73. Of course that does NOT mean the image was shot in 1972-72, only that the image was potentially used then.

Second clue are the clubs themselves. Several of the clubs have black shafts which tell me graphite. I don't think they painted steel shafts black and I doubt wood was still being used. Graphite shafts were first introduced in 1973.

Having said that, I still can't get over the "look" of the girls, their faces and hair styles. this just speaks 50's to me. The hair style of the early 70's was usually long. Check your old yearbooks. Girls did not wear their hair short or up with head bands, barrettes, etc.

I don't see any "stands," but on the left it looks more like a building. Perhaps a dorm or something as this may be on or near a college campus? Also looks like California to me with the hills and oaks in the background.

If the OP Alex is still reading this, perhaps it would be helpful to know how he found this and the context it was being used. I don't think this was setup for a "team" photo of any sort. I think it may have actually been set up to show exactly what Alex's research found, Large format "swing" technique.

Oh, and clearly some reflectors or fill flash of some sort was used. the first three girls show quite a bit of light on their faces considering the sun is high and behind them. The "fill" light quickly fades after the first 3.

What does this all mean? Absolutely squat.

Lon

[ic-racer]

From those who's golf club grip can be viewed in detail, the grip seems to be appropriate. This seems to favor that being a photograph of golfers, instead of models.

[alex best]

LINK to info on the photo. Sorry I was on holiday for the weekend.

[Darin Boville]

LINK to info on the photo. Sorry I was on holiday for the weekend.

Outstanding. Very cool resolution of the mystery. Here is part 2 of the short on YouTube--stars off with the golf routine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EQXh...eature=related


At 1:07 we get our favorite scene (see clip).

-Darin

[Lon Overacker]

Thanks for settling all the speculation Alex. Just speaking for myself, just goes to show what I know....

Thanks for the video links Darin! that is classic stuff. I love the old films, shorts, etc. Who'd a thunk we could get this kind of entertainment value on a LF techniques thread?

Lon

[Mike Anderson]

1934! My guess was late '50s early '60s. Way off. Fun little exercise though.

...Mike

[Robert Hughes]

1934! My guess was late '50s early '60s. Way off. Fun little exercise though.

...Mike

I figured mid 1930's from the hairdos.