historic photograph: real or fake?

[lostjr]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Keith%27s_Bicycle_Track,_1901-1902.JPG

I say it was not possible to stop action like this given the technology of the day. Others say it would be possible with flash powder.

Even if flash powder could stop action, I doubt that you could sync several of them, and this photo appears to have more than one light source.

I have read that Fox Talbot apparently experimented with stop action via electronic flash in 1850, but I don't know if this was ever practiced commercially.

AFAIK Muybridge just used a fast shutter, no flash.

[benrains]

If you used an electric carbon arc light (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_lamp) you wouldn't have to worry about syncing. They're continuous (and very bright) light sources. You'd just need a fast shutter.

[bobwysiwyg]

I vote fake. The hair styles and garment fabric fit appear modern to me. But, as my wife occasionally says, my opinions have variable and frequently minimal value. :o)

[benrains]

A little more research indicates the image is from the Byron Collection of the Museum of the City of New York. From the museum's website on the collection:


This database contains digital images and descriptive information about individual works in the Byron Collection. The collection consists of over 22,000 photographs of New York City and its environs taken by the Byron Company between 1890 and 1942.

If you run a search on 'keith' and 'bicycle' in their online database, a series of four images come up, all taken of the same bicycle track- http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/wiz10.cfm

If you just search on the term 'bicycle' there are actually a number of other stunt and trick bicycle images that are returned. So I'd say in the broader context of a known collection maintained by a museum that the image is 100% authentic.

[GPS]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Keith%27s_Bicycle_Track,_1901-1902.JPG

I say it was not possible to stop action like this given the technology of the day. Others say it would be possible with flash powder.

Even if flash powder could stop action, I doubt that you could sync several of them, and this photo appears to have more than one light source.

...

What exactly on the picture you think could not be done with the technology of that time?

[Kirk Keyes]

It's certainly staged or a trick photo, as the spokes are visible all the way out to the rims, and they would certainly be blurred for the near rider on the left. You need some speed to stay up on a wall that steep. The rider on the near right looks to have his foot on the ground and is not moving. It's an odd photo for certain.

[Mike Anderson]

I don't think they're moving very fast, judging by the lean angle. It's possible they are moving very very slow if they are skilled bicyclists. I don't think flash is necessary to capture this.

I see nothing that makes this technologically impossible for the early 1900's.

...Mike

[benrains]

Well, I do think Kirk's point about it being staged may have some merit, although it's a period photograph. In looking at the other photos of the track in the Byron Collection, 3 of the 4 images, each taken from very different perspectives, show all four riders in the same positions on the track. That seems a little odd.

[Paul Kierstead]

In looking at the other photos of the track in the Byron Collection, 3 of the 4 images, each taken from very different perspectives, show all four riders in the same positions on the track. That seems a little odd.

Beyond odd. At casual glance, the 3 seem identically positioned. If we didn't have the fourth, I'd say wax museum or something. As it is, it almost seems like it has to be some kind of show piece, with the riders not moving at all and held in place by means unseen. Very odd and pretty fascinating.

[Sevo]

All bikes are very upright - so they were not going fast, and may even have been caught at the slowest point in some synchronized pattern they were performing.

But that is rather irrelevant, as similar pictures would have been possible even at speed, with technology already common back then. The track is obviously erected on a theatre stage where there would have been plenty of bright arc light or limelight, film speeds already had reached 12-25 ISO, and lenses faster than f/4 had been widespread from the very start of photography (where slow plates made them mandatory). And last but not least, shutters were already capable of speeds of 1/1000s and faster at that time - they were not even experimental any more, Anschütz had been marketing his high speed cameras (mostly to rich amateurs - engineers were late at grasping their usefulness) since the 1880's.

[Sevo]

Well, I do think Kirk's point about it being staged may have some merit,


There is absolutely no doubt it is staged - four cyclists on such a tiny track will have to do a perfectly synchronized show if they are not to crash into each other. FWIW, the track is even set up ON a stage! Of course, they might have suspended the cyclists for the picture, but technically they hardly needed to, some 15 years after Anschütz, and the repeat pose across the different pictures might just as well be due to the photographer being asked to catch a particular (prominent) cyclist in a particular position.

[Jack Dahlgren]

I don't think that the New York Times would bother making a fake photo of a stage show. What would be the motivation?

Bicyclists have been doing tricks on bicycles since the second wheel was invented and this one is not particularly difficult. It is on stage. It is lit by strong stage lights. It is a team of cyclists who presumably do this show time and time again so they probably are typically in the same order each time.

I don't see any reason to consider it a fake.

[Paul Kierstead]

In the 3 shots they are not in just the same order, they are in identical positions (i.e. head turns, etc) in exactly the same positions on the track. Like 3 simultaneous exposures, which I suppose is not out of the question.

[GPS]

The first 3 pictures show 3 circling cyclists, the 4th guy is standing there on the bottom (waiting for the right moment to get to the circling him too? That's why they are looking at him?) Those are 3 different pictures, from 3 different angles. The fact that the cyclists are on more or less the same (but absolutely not identical!) places shows that there could be 3 cameras taking a quasi simultaneous picture?

[Sevo]

Like 3 simultaneous exposures, which I suppose is not out of the question.

No. But if the exposure was triggered by a bike reaching a particular position, the effect might be quite the same - the cyclists will have performed their routine pretty exactly the same each time.

[John Jarosz]

While it's not a fake, I believe the cyclists were stationary during the picture. They are almost upright. All they would need is a nail sticking out from the board(s) to prevent the tire(s) from sliding down. I believe you are assuming they are in motion. None of the riders are exerting any force to propel the bike. They are simply posing for the camera.

[dsphotog]

Board track racing was a popular spectator sport, so the theater setting was real.
I think it was a promo pic, with riders stationary on the track.
That had to be real scary to race on.

[sepiareverb]

Well tonality sure doesn't look like 1900 to me- shadow detail seems too modern.

And what is the guy at 8:00 wearing??

[Nathan Smith]

It's certainly staged or a trick photo, as the spokes are visible all the way out to the rims, and they would certainly be blurred for the near rider on the left. You need some speed to stay up on a wall that steep. The rider on the near right looks to have his foot on the ground and is not moving. It's an odd photo for certain.

That rider is actually on the ground and is stopped, hence the clear spokes. His position & expression, considering he's motionless, is kind of odd - he's either posing or considering how to join the others on the track :) The spokes on the others are not as clear and do look as though they might be moving. I agree that it is definitely odd.

[Eric James]

Cool shot, but I don't believe that the riders' positions are consistent with pedaling at those angles.


...And what is the guy at 8:00 wearing??

I think that's a Member's Only jacket, but I could be wrong.

[jnantz]

the b/b circus does something like this these days
except instead of pedal bikes they have motorcycles ...

[Darin Boville]

the b/b circus does something like this these days
except instead of pedal bikes they have motorcycles ...

Well, if you are going to add motorcycles yo need to also add a cantaloupe-sized metal, chromed ball.

--Darin

[Kirk Keyes]

Having ridden on a concrete velodrome that had 41 degree banks, I do not believe the riders could be riding slowly or near stationary on a small, wooden track with gaps between the slats. You need some speed to keep up on a track with high banks, otherwise your tires will slip down the surface of the track. The slower you go, the more upright you will be, and they guys are just not going very fast.

I like the suggestion someone made that the bikes are suppored. Perhaps there are pegs under the tires to hold them up on the banks.

[dsphotog]

We may never know how the shot was made, but, bike racers are tough, I think this sport should be part of the X Games . Sponsored by RedBull or Monster, & perhaps BlueCross Medical.

[rdenney]

Having ridden on a concrete velodrome that had 41 degree banks, I do not believe the riders could be riding slowly or near stationary on a small, wooden track with gaps between the slats. You need some speed to keep up on a track with high banks, otherwise your tires will slip down the surface of the track. The slower you go, the more upright you will be, and they guys are just not going very fast.

I agree. The maximum lean possible on a bicycle is about 45 degrees. The contact patch is not large, and the gaps between the slats on this "track" would create holes in that contact patch. The only way I can think of where riding such a track would be possible is to enter the track with some speed, even if from a standing start, so that the cyclists would be leaning into the track. The vector that describes the force of the cyclist into the track has to shift back and forth over the contact patch, else the cyclist falls.

My suspicion is that photographing stunt cyclists on such a track would be difficult, even with carbon-arc lamps, so they probably staged this photo for publicity purposes.

I do not, however, doubt that it is possible to ride such a track, even with four riders. These bikes have direct gearing, like all track bikes, and maintaining speed well enough for them to coordinate their actions is not that difficult. Those of us who have ridden track bikes on a velodrome will confirm that--one common practice in the early 20th century was for cyclists to follow motorcyclists on such tracks, with the cyclist having to maintain the tiny distance necessary to stay in the derny's draft without actually piling into it (though they did have rollers for casual touching).

Rick "whose track bike is collecting dust in the basement, as usual" Denney

[goamules]

Statues or a "still life" shot during the stated period. I read a snippet of this description somewhere but can't find it now.

[Kirk Keyes]

We may never know how the shot was made, but, bike racers are tough, I think this sport should be part of the X Games . Sponsored by RedBull or Monster, & perhaps BlueCross Medical.

Bicycle track racing is already part of the Summer Olympics. The real Olympics, not any X-Games or such thing...

It's actually pretty intertaining as the races are relatively short in length, run at high speeds, and very competetive.

[sun of sand]

11 thinks he's doing something people actually care about
8 knows he got bamboozled into it but now can only hope he doesn't injured by 5
5 is wondering how the other 3 got up on the track
2 is the eventual winner

[Kirk Gittings]

Board track racing was a popular spectator sport, so the theater setting was real.
I think it was a promo pic, with riders stationary on the track.
That had to be real scary to race on.

Only two of the bicyclist are actually on "racing cycles" (the ones with the drop bars-you can't generate any power in an upright position with the upright bars and too much wind resistance too). The other two are on cruisers. This is definitely not an actual race.

[sanking]

In one of her writings Susan Sontag talked about the veil of obscurity that eventually renders all photographs, even the most mundane, works of art. I suspect that the explanation for the making of this photograph is simple, but not knowing how it happened introduces an ambiguity that heightens our interest, as evidenced by the numerous comments in this thread.


Sandy King

[mrladewig]

In the 3 shots they are not in just the same order, they are in identical positions (i.e. head turns, etc) in exactly the same positions on the track. Like 3 simultaneous exposures, which I suppose is not out of the question.

Regarding the speed, I've ridden track bikes at the USOC track occasionally when I was racing in college. On a cement track, you do not need to ride very fast to stay up on the bank, even very high on the bank. When riding slow (and you can ride VERY slow), the bike will be very upright. It also appears that the crank arms are short to accomodate the angle (hitting a pedal on the bank is a good way to get some road rash).

If you've ever ridden a track bike, you'd also know that most of the riders will end up looking in the same direction on the turns at slow speed. They all look into to the turn. As it seems they're stunt riders, they all appear to be looking at the rider ahead or across from themselves to ensure pace. This is the expected position.

As for the spokes, if they're riding at just a couple miles per hour, I'm sure there is a shutter speed at which the spokes will not appear to move. After all, you've got to get into the 1/250 range to get good motion blur in race car wheels when panning, and they're going a whole lot faster than 1 or 2 miles per hour.

[Paul Kierstead]

In the event some of you have not actually viewed how strikingly close the photographs are:

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010859.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010860.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010861.jpg

[Paul Kierstead]

Incidently, there are lots more which don't come up in the index so easily, for example

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010866.jpg

These are varied.

[CarstenW]

In the event some of you have not actually viewed how strikingly close the photographs are:

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010859.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010860.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010861.jpg

The first two could be two prints from the same negative. The third one (and the original one) all have exactly the same configuration of bikes on the track, and the guy standing, so I guess that settles that: it is posed, and they are not moving. It must be just promotional material.

[mrladewig]

In the event some of you have not actually viewed how strikingly close the photographs are:

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010859.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010860.jpg
http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010861.jpg

I did not see the other photographs, so with that in mind, it does seem likely they are staged with bikes propped or something. I don't think that takes anything away from the image. Its a compelling image that implies motion, human form and inventiveness. I also believe the image could be composed and executed in motion with the equipment of the day, but there could be very valid reasons not to do so.

[Dan Fromm]

The bikes don't have to be propped. "Standing" isn't that difficult if the bike has a fixed hub, i.e., no freewheel. That's a track bike.

[Kirk Gittings]

The bikes don't have to be propped. "Standing" isn't that difficult if the bike has a fixed hub, i.e., no freewheel. That's a track bike.

But IME "standing" with the bike leaning is virtually impossible.

[rdenney]

But IME "standing" with the bike leaning is virtually impossible.

No, that's possible. What is not possible is doing it without the front wheel being turned. Doing a track stand for more than a couple of seconds with straight wheels is extremely difficult, even on smooth, flat pavement. A track stand on banking is actually easier, but the front wheel has to be turned into the banking. Then, rocking the pedals back and forth in small bits causes the gravity vector to pass back and forth over the contact patch, which is required to stay upright.

These guys have their wheels straight, and rocking the pedals would not have that required effect. And the openings in the surface would greatly complicate maintaining traction.

In one of the photos, the banking didn't look as steep as in the first photo. If it is 40 degrees or less, riding very slowly around the track might be possible.

Rick "who was never very good at track stands" Denney

[Mike Anderson]

But IME "standing" with the bike leaning is virtually impossible.

It could be done I think, standing and leaning, for an instant. The position would be the apex of a certain trajectory. Immediately after the decisive moment they would turn and roll down off the track.

My theory is that
1) they're moving very slowly or not moving
2) there's no hidden supports
3) it took much practice and experienced stunt riders to get the shot.
4) they wanted to get all 4 riders high on the track, but after many tries the best they could do was get 3 on the track.

Are the 3 guys on the track all looking at the guy not on the track?

My question is what was the point of this picture? Advertisement?

...Mike

[Kirk Gittings]

No, that's possible. What is not possible is doing it without the front wheel being turned. Doing a track stand for more than a couple of seconds with straight wheels is extremely difficult, even on smooth, flat pavement. A track stand on banking is actually easier, but the front wheel has to be turned into the banking. Then, rocking the pedals back and forth in small bits causes the gravity vector to pass back and forth over the contact patch, which is required to stay upright.

These guys have their wheels straight, and rocking the pedals would not have that required effect. And the openings in the surface would greatly complicate maintaining traction.

In one of the photos, the banking didn't look as steep as in the first photo. If it is 40 degrees or less, riding very slowly around the track might be possible.

Rick "who was never very good at track stands" Denney

I used to be pretty good with this on my road bike at stop lights. I should have added that you can't do it with the bike tilted AND with your body aligned with the tilt. You could tilt the bike if you then turned the wheel and moved your center of gravity back over past the top tube to compensate. But just turning the wheel with the bike tilted that much isn't going to solve the center of gravity problem. Regardless these guys are defying gravity if they are not moving.

[Mike Anderson]

Incidently, there are lots more which don't come up in the index so easily, for example

http://museumofnyc.doetech.net/VoyagerImages/Z001/Z00108/Z0010866.jpg

These are varied.

That one's a different track. This must have been a popular sport/exhibition: bicyclists spinning around a tiny banked track. Maybe the chain driven bicycle was new and this was to promote "the bicycle of the future".

...Mike

[rdenney]

But just turning the wheel with the bike tilted that much isn't going to solve the center of gravity problem. Regardless these guys are defying gravity if they are not moving.

It will if the bike has a fixed gear. If you can pedal the bike in both directions, then you can rock the pedals back and forth with the front wheel turned, and it will tilt you back and forth over the tire contact patches. That's how it's done on a track bike.

On a road bike with a freewheel, that trick doesn't work. For that, you need to move your body back and forth, but it's still inherently unstable. I bet you've fallen if you have attempted track stands at red lights a lot. I don't know a single person who does it regularly who has not fallen, including me. It's one of the standard embarrassments for bikies.

I have for the last dozen years or so used Speedplay pedals and no longer worry about unmanning myself when clipping back in after the light goes green, so now in my unbalanced old age I just put a foot down when I stop. And even doing that I occasionally fall--the other way. Sheesh.

Rick "not exactly putting a lot of miles on the bike, though" Denney

[Kirk Gittings]

I bet you've fallen if you have attempted track stands at red lights a lot.

You think?:eek:

[archer]

Has anyone noticed the diffuse shadows? If this was taken with direct light source or even flash powder, wouldn't the shadows be much crisper and if taken with available light, a fast film would be needed to stop the action with a shutter speed fast enough to arrest motion without blur?
Denise Libby

[Mike Anderson]

Has anyone noticed the diffuse shadows? If this was taken with direct light source or even flash powder, wouldn't the shadows be much crisper and if taken with available light, a fast film would be needed to stop the action with a shutter speed fast enough to arrest motion without blur?
Denise Libby

There's multiple light sources - see the slat shadows on the floor inside the track. This is quite the mysterious photograph.

...Mike

[lostjr]

I take it that there were not necessarily technical limitations to stopping this sort of action at the time, although:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/429896681.html?dids=429896681:429896681&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Jun+21%2C+1896&author=&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=TOO+FAST+FOR+PICTURES.&pqatl=google

In the end, I think it is staged (a) because of the three people on the track being in the same position on more than one frame. Numerous ideas about wire trips, multiple cameras and simultaneous exposures raise the question of why would you go to the trouble for some publicity photos?

(b) Context. At this time, the Byron people did theatrical photos. I suspect posed was the standard way of doing those. There was no scientific interest in stopping action, and in the interest of getting a quality image that would serve promotional purposes, the emphasis would have been on good lighting, and _being sure_ of getting people in the position you wanted. Rigging and retouching would not have been that difficult, and was probably common.

[Sevo]

There was no scientific interest in stopping action,

There was - Muybridge, Anschütz and others had already pioneered that decades earlier. But advertising was straightforward, nobody would have bothered to create (fake) scientific imagery in promotional photographs for a theatrical performance...