Originally Posted by Hologram
I too see some "new" things n there. :)
I think a few may still be missing, but being in French makes it harder to spot.
I did spot a few technical problems; not to criticise, but just FYI...
Becquerel, Sur la communication de M. Lippmann, 1891.pdf
are the same, but the larger one file has some notes on chemistry by Lippmann (I think) at the end. Probably not relevant (?)
Berget Photographie 1901.pdf
is actually a smallish file, but it is repeated 3 times... humm sticky fngers?
Ives Present condition.pdf
Ives Present condition of color photography.pdf
are the same...
Labatut, L'absorption et la photographie des couleurs,1891.pdf
are also the same.
Keep in mind, I dont really read French & I was hurring so it is possible I could be wrong :o
I actually went through the whole list and found various things to comment on but I guess that will have to wait,
I just menton these things here as I will clean-up some of the files... orientation etc, eventually and If i do, others may as well... since we have no need to duplcate all this work... if anyone else does print and re-scans or anything we should talk.
I had hoped I could get OCR from improved scans... even if by drawing in the letters by hand but so far no such luck. Best effect is size and orientation improvements. :(
Anyway, thanks for bringing these together!
Thanks for this new link. I've saved all of the files on my hard drive. I've just finished reading the "Je sais tout" interview of Lippmann. Very interesting although a bit off topic since Lippmann explains in this layman type of mag titled "Je sais tout" ("I know everything") how he has found a way to capture some kind of "holograms" based on the structure of some insects' eyes. There are pictures and descriptions of Lippmann and his laboratory at La Sorbonne. Funny detail, this new invention doesn't require a camera, just a plate holder that you open and close in order to expose it to the scene you want to capture.
Lionel, he must be referring to "integral photography". This is a fascinating topic in itself!
Indeed, I'd like to attempt it myself, but the lens sheets are fairly expensive, though not completely prohibitive. It requries no camera, because each "fly's eye" is a little lens that makes a tiny image. All of these tiny images, after being developed and placed back exactly where they were under the lens sheet, will be magnfied by the fly's eye's dependant on the angle at which you're looking at it. Thus each eye will see something different... the foundation for stereoscopy! That might not be the easiest to understand explanation, but I got excited.
Yes, he must have been refering to "integral photography". I understand how it can record thousands of images on the plate from slightly different points of view but I don't see so far how one is supposed to be able to reconstruct the whole 3D image from it if one doesn't have a fly's brain. That's another mystery to investigate now. Cool!
By the way I'm sent Ray my take on the translation of the first Lippmann paper from 1891.
Well, it's reconstructed just as easily as it's taken. The taking lenses become the viewing lenses.... it works off a phenomenon called the "sampling effect". It's pretty easy to understand, but very hard to explain. Have a look at wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_photography
The only catch is that the 1st generation image will be pseudoscopic, that is, a face would look like the inside of a mask. You have to make 2 generations to get an ortho-stereoscopic image. Hence, its limited success as an imaging technique. However, I think a pseudoscopic image would still be worth the effort.
Looking forward to any translations, I'd be more than happy to spruce them up if necessary.
Thanks for the link to the Integral Photography sources. Very interesting too (in one of the papers, there is a reproduction of a self-portrait in color by Lippmann himself).
I don't know how to post a file here yet so I sent my translation to Ray.
That translation has been spruced up and is on it's way back to Lionel :)
Originally Posted by Lionel1972
So I was at the Nelson-Atkins Museum yesterday in Kansas City and they had a modern daguerrotype of a park scene and the sky was distinctly blue! My girlfriend thought that the cherry blossoms looked slightly pink as well. I've heard of daguerrotypes exhibiting "spontaneous" color, even in the far distant past, but no one seemed to be able to get repeatable results. There's a write up somewhere in the tubes (the internet that is) about this and one man's modern efforts.
Anyways, just an interesting aside to the world of interference color photography.
I'd love to get my hands on those translations by the way, if either Lionel or Ray are willing. :D
UDPATE..... ok, I contacted the museum and here is the guy.... http://www.jerryspagnoli.com/ I haven't read much yet, and I'm not sure if it's "true color" interference or more of a solarization effect. Either way, it's worth looking at.
Yes. I think both processes can suffer from solarization and those seem to appear as a paint-by-numbers sky blue.
Originally Posted by holmburgers
(ever make a paint-by-numbers painting?) :p
As far as the translations go,
They do take time to do reasonably well (it is amazing how much things change the closer you look at them!) and of course, there are protocols that need to be followed.
The first one should be available shortly, (unfortunately a small cosmetic problem needs to be dealt with first so) it will be another day or so....
Don't get too excited though, it's just a short paper. :(
Originally Posted by Ray Rogers
Here is that work: