Help Baldy replicate this shot

Baldy

I stumbled across an amazing high res panorama of SF, shot not long after the 1906 earthquake:



And I would love to print it 60" high by 150" wide. The kicker is I'd like to print another right above it at the same size of modern-day SF, presumably from a helicopter.

How do I get the exact same perspective? Can anyone figure out what camera/lens combo was used? I don't mind shooting film if it's a 6x17 camera or whatever.

Here's more about it:

http://onemansblog.com/2008/04/04/gigapixel-photo-of-1906-san-francisco-earthquake-aftermath/

zoomer

Amazing photo! Sorry no help here.

SimpsonBrothers

It was definetly taken by KAP from the Port Of San Francisco centered on Market street, guessing about 200' up. (I was wrong, it was 2000' up)

Photograph of San Francisco in ruins from Lawrence Captive Airship, 2000 feet above San Francisco Bay...; 1906
Geo. R. Lawrence Co.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Lawrence#San_Francisco_photo

One of Lawrence's world renowned photographs is of the ruins of San Francisco, California after the 1906 earthquake. It is a 160-degree panorama from a kite taken 2000 feet (600 m) in the air above the San Francisco Bay that showed the entire city on a single 17-by-48-inch contact print made from a single piece of film. Each print sold for $125 and Lawrence made at least $15,000 in sales from this one photograph. The camera used in this photograph weighed 49 pounds (22 kg) and used a celluloid-film plate.

In 2006, Juneau-based photographer Ronald Klein built a working replica of Lawrence's camera and used it to rephotograph San Francisco from about the same location (but from a helicopter, not a kite), 100 years after the earthquake. The rephotograph was actually taken by Mark Walsh, George R. Lawrence's great grandson, who rode in the helicopter, held the camera, and clicked the shutter.

Baldy

Yikes, someone said it was taken with an 8x20-inch negative... Gonna be hard to find an 8x20 camera with the right lens to duplicate this shot.

Maybe a stitch from a stationary helicopter using a digital camera and then using Photoshop to warp the perspective so it matches this perspective?

SimpsonBrothers

contact http://elmon.smugmug.com/ he may be able to help you out to actually reproduce the original...

W.W. Webster

Baldy wrote: »

The kicker is I'd like to print another right above it at the same size of modern-day SF, presumably from a helicopter.

That would look fantastic but you face some fascinating technical and logistical issues!

Baldy wrote: »

How do I get the exact same perspective?

According to the link you cited, the original was shot at an altitude of 2,000 feet, although this will be approximate, but no GPS position is given! However by calculating the point of convergence of a couple of the streets that are clearly visible, shouldn't it be possible to calculate a fairly accurate latitude/longitude location? As a local, you should be able to identify the streets and work this out, I would have thought? The streets would also provide the reference necessary to accurately determine the direction you will need to be facing when you shoot the new image.

Baldy wrote: »

Can anyone figure out what camera/lens combo was used? I don't mind shooting film if it's a 6x17 camera or whatever.

The same reference states "Lawrence designed his own large-format cameras ..." and that "... he developed a method of taking aerial views with cameras suspended from unmanned kites". It would be helpful if you could find the original camera used, but use of a helicopter instead of a kite (and with appropriate aviation air space clearances) might be advisable!

Apparently, when Lawrence went on to a career in aviation design, his photography company was succeeded by a firm called Kaufmann & Fabry. Can the whereabouts of whatever happened to that firm and its assets be traced somehow? The camera may be sitting in a museum somewhere, or at least you may be able to find records that specify the characteristics of the camera and lens that Lawrence was likely to have been used.

It's clear a very wide angle lens was involved in the original, given the pronounced curvature of the dock area. I'm intrigued to know how you would make the calculations to emulate that effect if you were going to use multiple stitched images. It could be that some trial and error might be involved.

DeVerm

Am I the only one who can see post #3?! It has all been done in 2006 already:

In 2006, Juneau-based photographer Ronald Klein built a working replica of Lawrence's camera and used it to rephotograph San Francisco from about the same location (but from a helicopter, not a kite), 100 years after the earthquake. The rephotograph was actually taken by Mark Walsh, George R. Lawrence's great grandson, who rode in the helicopter, held the camera, and clicked the shutter.

cheers,
Nick.

eoren1

Here's the 2006 version (on gigapan)

http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/8568/

eoren1

And here's the (replica) camera that did it

W.W. Webster

eoren1 wrote: »

And here's the (replica) camera that did it

... and the original was hung from a kite?

Baldy

eoren1 wrote: »

And here's the (replica) camera that did it

When I first read this, I thought, FANTASTIC!!!! How amazing that they replicated the shot exactly as it was taken, 100 years later. And how wonderful to hear that the original was taken with such an amazing camera. It makes you bow in respect to the incredible original photograph.

But while we became even more determined to print the original very big (72x200 or so) because of our heightened respect for it, we were a little bit deflated by the replica. The original had spectacular lighting with God's rays shining down and dramatic reflections on the water, and great clouds. The replica is flat, taken at 12:20 on an uninteresting day.

I don't see why the century-later shot has to be taken with a replica camera. Why can't it be taken with modern equipment under great lighting and then just mapped in Photoshop to provide the same exact perspective? And maybe even on an interesting day with boat races going on, or the San Francisco Marathon being run, or the tall ships in the harbor, etc.? Why can't it be in color?

One of the fascinating things about the original is it wasn't taken on an ordinary day, and it had fascinating ships in the harbor, etc.

ziggy53

The location:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/nca/1906/kap/location.php

DeVerm

ziggy53 wrote: »

The location:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/nca/1906/kap/location.php

yes, and this is a different re-shoot with 2 camera's, both in color. See http://scotthaefner.com/beyond/san-francisco-100-years-later/

I think these are shot from too low.

cheers,
Nick.

Baldy

Wow, even more fascinating stuff! But the new photos were shot from too low and with too low a res and again on an uninteresting day.

We needa make a project out of getting a spectacular shot worthy of the original.

W.W. Webster

Baldy wrote: »

We needa make a project out of getting a spectacular shot worthy of the original.

... and you're just the man to do it - without compromise!

BradfordBenn

I can picture it now. Baldy hanging under the Goodyear Blimp with Kevin's Frankencamera during Fleet Week or the Red Bull Air Races.

DeVerm

I feel a gigapixel HD panorama, shot with 300mm coming up

ciao!
Nick.

SimpsonBrothers

If you could figure out the elevation then you can shoot this with a 15mm fisheye. (180* field of view diagonally)

W.W. Webster

Any developments?