1938 Aerial Photos

[Ric Gillespie]

We see the same "thingy" in the upper left corner, as well as the front end of the starboard wing pontoon mid-frame on the right side of the image.  From this orientation we can deduce that the observer was taking pictures out of the starboard window, and the airplane was flying south to north.

The "thingy" is in every photo and in exactly the same place in upper left hand corner of the frame.  I think it's in the camera, not something on the airplane.  If so, it's not an indication of which way the airplane is flying.  Of course, the float is a clear indication of the airplane's direction of flight.  The float is in some photos  but not in others.  When it does appear, it's always the starboard side float.  So, either all of the photos were taken from the starboard side of the airplane or none of the photos taken from the port side included the float.

[Wayne O'Neill]

Is it possible that the location of the "PBO" may be a little beyond the left hand edge of the crop of frame 341 shown above due to the slightly different perspective (almost directly above the NC) and increased magnification of that frame?

[Ric Gillespie]

Is it possible that the location of the "PBO" may be a little beyond the left hand edge of the crop of frame 341 shown above due to the slightly different perspective (almost directly above the NC) and increased magnification of that frame?

The PBO is south of the prominent bush on the shore which is also visible in 341.  I've brought the PBO to Jeff Glickman's attention.  He says it could be a flawed grain in the film but it seems too big for that. He's going to do a precise geo-reference to see if it's in the same place as the Bevington Object appears in the 1937 photo.  If it is, then it's probably the Bevington object.  Jeff wanted me to pass along his compliments to John Baldreston for spotting this thing - whatever it is.

Jeff also cautioned me that a forensic imaging job has come up that will keep him busy for the next couple weeks so we'll have to be patient.

[Wayne O'Neill]

Thanks Ric.

I found this info (which may explain the "thingy") here: http://www.aerialsearch.net/terms.html

"An aerial photography camera "stamps" a marker—most often a black shape of some kind—in the corner and/or center of the each outer edge of every frame that it takes.  These shapes are called "fiducial points", and are used to help properly align the photos and make measurements of terrain details which the photos depict."

Looking at some of the low-res examples that have been posted it seems that notes of some kind may have been scribed in that unexposed corner of each negative?

[Ric Gillespie]

Looking at some of the low-res examples that have been posted it seems that notes of some kind may have been scribed in that unexposed corner of each negative?

I think you're right.  Even in the hi-res images the numbers are barely discernible, if at all.

[John Balderston]

The "thingy" is in every photo and in exactly the same place in upper left hand corner of the frame.  I think it's in the camera, not something on the airplane.  If so, it's not an indication of which way the airplane is flying.  Of course, the float is a clear indication of the airplane's direction of flight.  The float is in some photos  but not in others.  When it does appear, it's always the starboard side float.  So, either all of the photos were taken from the starboard side of the airplane or none of the photos taken from the port side included the float.

Thanks Ric - makes good sense!  And thanks Wayne for the idea of a "fiducial point" - this thing in the corner looks like a physical object, so I'm checking out aerial photography techniques in the 1930's to see if it was a fixed object attached to the camera.  Interesting!  v/r JB

[Wayne O'Neill]

John it was probably something near the film "gate" of the roll film holder which stopped light from hitting the film at that corner. From my photography background I know that some photographers would file characteristic notches into the film gate of each roll film back they used so that they could identify which one needed repair in the event of problems (light leaks, poor frame spacing, etc).

From my brief bit of internet research, fiducial points (if that is what the markings on these negatives are) seem to be mainly used for mapping applications when aerial cameras are oriented in a vertical position, rather than the oblique views photographed in this instance.

[Ted G Campbell]

Ric,
I know it's early, but has Jeff found anything of interest in the new photos thus far?

We all know he has a "day job" and our interest is secondary to his making a living but it would be neat to hear he has seen something that woud peak our interest.

Ted Campbell

[Ric Gillespie]

I know it's early, but has Jeff found anything of interest in the new photos thus far?

As you correctly note, Jeff has a day job that keeps him very busy. Asking him to meticulously inspect each of the 41 images would be neither fair nor efficient. We already know there are a number of objects of interest that Jeff will want to look at and, if possible, quantify as to size and probable composition.

Jeff was our guest for part of one day of the recent TIGHAR Board of Directors meeting and we talked in some detail about the 1938 Aerial Photos.  Those discussions led to the formation of the Study Group that is just now getting up and running.   The Study Group will examine the photos in great detail and, we hope, identify objects, features or anomalies to which Jeff can then apply highly specialized forensic techniques.  When we have results we'll report back to the Forum.

[Tim Collins]

...
The Study Group will examine the photos in great detail and, we hope, identify objects, features or anomalies to which Jeff can then apply highly specialized forensic techniques.  When we have results we'll report back to the Forum.

Is this to suggest that Jeff won't be thoroughly examining all the photos but just items of interest identified by the study group?

[Ric Gillespie]

Is this to suggest that Jeff won't be thoroughly examining all the photos but just items of interest identified by the study group?

Not necessarily.  Jeff will want to take a close look at all of the images but having a number of eyeballs on best-resolution copies of the photos should jump-start the process and save a lot of time.

[matt john barth]

How long will it be before you let us look at the new photos? Sure would be a good time to look thru them and speculate with people on the forum. Great way to pass time. I'll also understand why if you can't post them yet.

Matt

[Ric Gillespie]

How long will it be before you let us look at the new photos? Sure would be a good time to look thru them and speculate with people on the forum. Great way to pass time. I'll also understand why if you can't post them yet.

We do not have permission from the RNZAF to publish the photos for the general public.  They are approved only for TIGHAR research.  Hi-res jpegs of the photos are available to any TIGHAR member at the TIGHAResearcher level or above via the TIGHAR Flickr account.

[Kevin Weeks]

you can't put up low resolution JPEGs of the new images we haven't seen??

[Ric Gillespie]

you can't put up low resolution JPEGs of the new images we haven't seen??

As I have tried to explain, we only have permission to use the photos for TIGHAR research.  What does that mean?  Who is a TIGHAR researcher?  Any member of the general public who signs on to the forum?  That renders the restriction meaningless.  A TIGHAR researcher is a TIGHAR member who has jpi[oined TIGHAR at the TIGHAResearcher level.

Posting the aerial photos for everyone as lo-res jpegs would not only violate the spirit of our agreement with the RNZAF but would not result in useful observations.