Take a Virtual Reality Tour of the World’s Stolen Art

A muse­um which con­tains only works of art that nobody can find sounds like some­thing Jorge Luis Borges would’ve dreamed up, but it has twice become a real­i­ty in the 21st cen­tu­ry — or twice become a vir­tu­al real­i­ty, any­way. “The Con­cert by Johannes Ver­meer. Pop­py Flow­ers by Vin­cent van Gogh. Rembrandt’s The Storm on the Sea of Galilee. These are some of the world’s most famous and expen­sive paint­ings ever stolen,” writes Fast Com­pa­ny’s Mark Wil­son. And though their where­abouts remain unknown, you can see them at The Muse­um of Stolen Art, “a vir­tu­al real­i­ty exhi­bi­tion cre­at­ed by Ziv Schnei­der, a grad­u­ate stu­dent at Tisch ITP, that puts stolen works back on dis­play.”

museum of stolen art

At the moment, Schnei­der’s project exists on Google’s vir­tu­al real­i­ty plat­form Card­board, and you can down­load it as a smart­phone app for iOS or Android. Its cur­rent exhibits include “a col­lec­tion of pho­tographs list­ed as stolen in the FBI’s art crime data­base”; the pri­vate col­lec­tion of Fer­di­nand and Imel­da Mar­cos, for­mer pres­i­dent and first lady of the Philip­pines, now “being searched for by the PCGG – a Philip­pine gov­ern­ment office in charge of seiz­ing the Mar­cos’ ill got­ten wealth and bring­ing it back”; and “a large col­lec­tion of paint­ings stolen in some of the world’s most famous art heists, includ­ing the Stew­art and Isabel­la Gard­ner Muse­um in Boston.”

But even before Schnei­der’s insti­tu­tion opened its vir­tu­al-real­i­ty doors, writes The Cre­ators Pro­jec­t’s Becky Chung, “halfway across the world anoth­er insti­tu­tion — also called the Muse­um of Stolen Art — was debut­ing its gallery exhi­bi­tion of works cur­rent­ly report­ed stolen or miss­ing.” This Muse­um of Stolen Art, in the Nether­lands, presents the Pop­py Flow­ers and Water­loo Bridges of the art world in not vir­tu­al but aug­ment­ed real­i­ty: its vis­i­tors raise their phones or tablets up to its mean­ing­ful­ly emp­ty walls, and on their screens see the pur­loined works restored to their right­ful frames. William Gib­son, in some sense the Bor­ge­sian vision­ary of our tech-sat­u­rat­ed time, has described aug­ment­ed real­i­ty as the nat­ur­al evo­lu­tion of vir­tu­al real­i­ty. It’s made vir­tu­al art recov­ery pos­si­ble; can vir­tu­al art theft be far behind?

museum of stolen art 3

Reminder: You can down­load The Muse­um of Stolen Art smart­phone app on iOS and AndroidThe app is ide­al­ly designed for those with a Google card­board view­er.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

1.8 Mil­lion Free Works of Art from World-Class Muse­ums: A Meta List of Great Art Avail­able Online

Vis­it The Muse­um of Online Muse­ums (MoOM): A Mega Col­lec­tion of 220 Online Exhi­bi­tions

The British Muse­um Is Now Open To Every­one: Take a Vir­tu­al Tour and See 4,634 Arti­facts, Includ­ing the Roset­ta Stone

Take a Vir­tu­al Tour of the 1913 Exhi­bi­tion That Intro­duced Avant-Garde Art to Amer­i­ca

Take a 3D Vir­tu­al Tour of the Sis­tine Chapel, St. Peter’s Basil­i­ca and Oth­er Art-Adorned Vat­i­can Spaces

Take a Vir­tu­al Tour of Hierony­mus Bosch’s Bewil­der­ing Mas­ter­piece The Gar­den of Earth­ly Delights

What Are the Most Stolen Books? Book­store Lists Fea­ture Works by Muraka­mi, Bukows­ki, Bur­roughs, Von­negut, Ker­ouac & Palah­niuk

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities and cul­ture. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­ma, the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future?, and the Los Ange­les Review of Books’ Korea Blog. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

The Best 100 Movies of the 21st Century (So Far) Named by 177 Film Critics

Mulholland Drive Cover

When prompt­ed to think of the cin­e­mat­ic peaks of the 20th cen­tu­ry, or of spe­cif­ic decades like the 1930s, the 1970s, or the 1990s, we can usu­al­ly thread up spe­cif­ic exam­ples in the pro­jec­tor of our mind right away. Grand Illu­sion and Gone with the Wind! Taxi Dri­ver and The God­fa­therPulp Fic­tion and Far­go! But in this cen­tu­ry it gets trick­i­er. This prob­a­bly does­n’t have to do with a pre­cip­i­tous drop in the qual­i­ty of cin­e­ma itself, nor with a lack of films to con­sid­er — indeed, the 2000s and 2010s so far have bur­dened cinephiles with more crit­i­cal­ly-acclaimed pic­tures than they can get around to see­ing.

The rel­a­tive recen­cy of the movies of the 21st cen­tu­ry presents some­thing of a chal­lenge, since the zeit­geist has­n’t had quite enough time to digest most of them. And what now con­sti­tutes the “zeit­geist,” any­way? We live in a post­mod­ern time, we often read, and that usu­al­ly seems to mean that a greater vari­ety of aes­thet­ic sen­si­bil­i­ties, his­tor­i­cal peri­ods, and world cul­tures now coex­ist for us on an essen­tial­ly lev­el play­ing field than ever before. The expe­ri­ence of the mod­ern movie­go­er reflects this con­di­tion, as does the BBC’s list of the 21st cen­tu­ry’s 100 great­est films (so far), the top ten of which fol­low:

  1. Mul­hol­land Dri­ve (David Lynch, 2001)
  2. In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-wai, 2000)
  3. There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Ander­son, 2007)
  4. Spir­it­ed Away (Hayao Miyaza­ki, 2001)
  5. Boy­hood (Richard Lin­klater, 2014)
  6. Eter­nal Sun­shine of the Spot­less Mind (Michel Gondry, 2004)
  7. The Tree of Life (Ter­rence Mal­ick, 2011)
  8. Yi Yi: A One and a Two (Edward Yang, 2000)
  9. A Sep­a­ra­tion (Asghar Farha­di, 2011)
  10. No Coun­try for Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007)

To pro­duce the list, the BBC sur­veyed 177 crit­ics “from every con­ti­nent except Antarc­ti­ca. Some are news­pa­per or mag­a­zine review­ers, oth­ers write pri­mar­i­ly for web­sites; aca­d­e­mics and cin­e­ma cura­tors are well-rep­re­sent­ed too.” They note that they include the year 2000, though not tech­ni­cal­ly part of the cen­tu­ry, since “not only did we all cel­e­brate the turn of the mil­len­ni­um on 31 Decem­ber 1999, but the year 2000 was a land­mark in glob­al cin­e­ma, and, in par­tic­u­lar, saw the emer­gence of new clas­sics from Asia like noth­ing we had ever seen before,” not just Yi Yi and In the Mood for Love but Ang Lee’s Crouch­ing Tiger, Hid­den Drag­on a bit down the list.

France, though a coun­try close­ly asso­ci­at­ed with mid-20th-cen­tu­ry cin­e­ma, makes an admirable show­ing here with the likes of Agnès Var­da’s The Glean­ers & I, Michael Haneke’s Caché, Claire Denis’ White Mate­r­i­al, and Jean-Luc Godard­’s voy­age into 3D, Good­bye to Lan­guage. Some films shame­ful­ly over­looked at their ini­tial release, like Ken­neth Lon­er­gan’s Mar­garet and Andrew Dominik’s The Assas­si­na­tion of Jesse James by the Cow­ard Robert Ford, appear here as per­haps a pre­lude to their right­ful redis­cov­ery. We can tell which auteurs have defined the cin­e­mat­ic cen­tu­ry so far by the pres­ence of more than one of their works: the late Abbas Kiarosta­mi’s Ten and Cer­ti­fied Copy both appear, as do three films by Thai­land’s Apichat­pong Weerasethakul and six by those still-ambi­tious once-wun­derkinds of Amer­i­can cin­e­ma, the Ander­sons Wes and Paul Thomas.

Most of these movies exploit, to a deep­er extent than the crit­i­cal­ly acclaimed pic­tures of decades pre­vi­ous, the cre­ation of dream­like expe­ri­ences pos­si­ble in film. None do it more vivid­ly, per­haps, than the occu­pi­er of the top spot, David Lynch’s Mul­hol­land Dri­ve. The selec­tion will sur­prise some read­ers, and oth­ers not at all. What makes that par­tic­u­lar movie so good? Con­ve­nient­ly, the BBC pro­vides on the side­bar a link to an arti­cle by Luke Buck­mas­ter explain­ing just that.

Buck­mas­ter com­pares Mul­hol­land Dri­ve to Cit­i­zen Kane, “writer/director Orson Welles’ esteemed 1941 fea­ture film debut – BBC Culture’s crit­ics poll of the 100 great­est Amer­i­can films last year put Kane at num­ber one. If Kane can be viewed as an essay on the nuts and bolts of film-mak­ing – a mas­ter­class in tech­ni­cal process­es, from mon­tage to deep focus, dis­solves and the manip­u­la­tion of mise en scèneMul­hol­land Dri­ve’s appeal is more the­mat­ic and con­cep­tu­al. It is less a demon­stra­tion of how great cin­e­ma is achieved than what great cin­e­ma can achieve, its capac­i­ty for ideas seem­ing­ly end­less.” May the remain­ing 84 years of the 21st cen­tu­ry find that capac­i­ty more end­less still.

See the BBC’s com­plete list here.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

1,150 Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, etc.

The 10 Great­est Films of All Time Accord­ing to 846 Film Crit­ics

The 10 Great­est Films of All Time Accord­ing to 358 Film­mak­ers

120 Artists Pick Their Top 10 Films in the Cri­te­ri­on Col­lec­tion

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities and cul­ture. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­ma, the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future?, and the Los Ange­les Review of Books’ Korea Blog. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

Star Trek Postage Stamps Coming Soon: Celebrating 50 Years of Exploring the Final Frontier

star-trek-stamps

The orig­i­nal Star Trek TV series took to the air­waves near­ly 5o years ago–on Sep­tem­ber 8, 1966. Poor rat­ings meant that the show did­n’t last very long (only three years). But every­thing changed once the show went into syn­di­ca­tion. It achieved cult sta­tus. And a fran­chise was born. The orig­i­nal Star Trek has now spawned five addi­tion­al tv series, 13 fea­ture films, and a num­ber of fan-made sequels.

To cel­e­brate 50 years of Star Trek, the US Postal Ser­vice has decid­ed to release a com­mem­o­ra­tive set of stamps inspired by the orig­i­nal show. The four stamps (shown above) depict the fol­low­ing:

  • The Star­ship Enter­prise inside the out­line of a Starfleet insignia against a gold back­ground.
  • The sil­hou­ette of a crew­man in a trans­porter against a red back­ground.
  • The sil­hou­ette of the Enter­prise from above against a green back­ground.
  • The Enter­prise inside the out­line of the Vul­can salute (Spock’s icon­ic hand ges­ture) against a blue back­ground.

The stamps will be offi­cial­ly avail­able on Sep­tem­ber 2, though they can be pre-ordered here.

via Kot­tke

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Watch Star Trek Con­tin­ues: The Crit­i­cal­ly-Acclaimed, Fan-Made Sequel to the Orig­i­nal TV Series

How Isaac Asi­mov Went from Star Trek Crit­ic to Star Trek­Fan & Advi­sor

Nichelle Nichols Explains How Mar­tin Luther King Con­vinced Her to Stay on Star Trek

The Com­plete Star Wars “Fil­mu­men­tary”: A 6‑Hour, Fan-Made Star Wars Doc­u­men­tary, with Behind-the-Scenes Footage & Com­men­tary

Hard­ware Wars: The Moth­er of All Star Wars Fan Films (and the Most Prof­itable Short Film Ever Made)

Star Wars Uncut: The Epic Fan Film

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Penn Jillette Makes the Philosophical & Pragmatic Case for Libertarianism

For an anar­chist like Noam Chom­sky, lib­er­tar­i­an­ism as it’s under­stood in the U.S. is a cor­rup­tion of the term. Through­out their polit­i­cal his­to­ry, Chom­sky argues, “real” Lib­er­tar­i­ans have been anti-Capitalist—and he includes under this head­ing such clas­si­cal lib­er­als as Adam Smith and Thomas Jef­fer­son, as well as mod­ern anar­cho-social­ists like him­self. Mod­ern U.S. Lib­er­tar­i­ans like Ron and Rand Paul, Mil­ton Fried­man, and Robert Noz­ick have all meant some­thing very dif­fer­ent by the term, and cer­tain­ly haven’t agreed on what that is. So what exact­ly is Lib­er­tar­i­an­ism?

Giv­en pop­u­lar misconceptions—and some less than stel­lar pub­lic rela­tions moments—one per­haps gets a clear­est idea of what Amer­i­can Lib­er­tar­i­an­ism is by read­ing about what it isn’t, as in this essay from one of its most con­trar­i­an the­o­rists, Mur­ray Roth­bard. Or we can spend a few min­utes with that vol­u­ble comedic magi­cian Penn Jil­lette, a well-known face of Lib­er­tar­i­an and athe­ist thought for many years. Jillette’s the­sis in his eigh­teen-minute Big Think video above comes down to this: “we think you should take as lit­tle from oth­er peo­ple by force as pos­si­ble and you should be able to do what­ev­er you think is right.” Lib­er­tar­i­an­ism, Jil­lette elab­o­rates, “is the strongest sense of ‘please, do what you want, try not to hurt me.”

The con­cept he refers to is one Isa­iah Berlin wrote of as “neg­a­tive lib­er­ty,” or the prin­ci­ple of non­in­ter­fer­ence, a sta­ple of all Lib­er­tar­i­an thought. The heavy stress on indi­vid­ual rights has come in for cri­tique as naïve, but as Roth­bard notes, “no indi­vid­u­al­ist denies that peo­ple are influ­enc­ing each oth­er all the time.” Lib­er­tar­i­an thinkers have wres­tled with the con­flict (if not con­tra­dic­tion) between max­i­mal indi­vid­ual free­dom and free­dom from harm. Robert Noz­ick, for exam­ple, extend­ed his dis­cus­sion beyond our respon­si­bil­i­ties to each oth­er to a moral case study of our duties toward ani­mals. Respon­si­bil­i­ty stands as a key term in Jillette’s artic­u­la­tion of Libertarianism—a sine qua non of a Lib­er­tar­i­an soci­ety.

But is there such a thing as a func­tion­ing Lib­er­tar­i­an soci­ety? Or does Jil­lette describe an unre­al­iz­able utopia that depends not only on most peo­ple act­ing respon­si­bly, but also on most peo­ple act­ing ratio­nal­ly? As he him­self says, “Lib­er­tar­i­an­ism is tak­ing a right on mon­ey, your first left on sex, and look­ing for utopia straight ahead.” This lan­guage aside, he doesn’t seem to oper­ate under the illu­sion that peo­ple always make the best choic­es for them­selves or their fam­i­lies. As part of his argu­ment, how­ev­er, he admits he isn’t qual­i­fied or desirous to make those choic­es for oth­er peo­ple when he can often bare­ly dis­cern the right course of action for him­self. As it gen­er­al­ly does, this course of rea­son­ing brings us to the prob­lem of tax­a­tion in Lib­er­tar­i­an thought.

Jillette’s appeal seems com­mon­sen­si­cal and prag­mat­ic, and after his gen­er­al pitch, he launch­es into a cri­tique of cor­po­rate cap­i­tal­ism that could come right out of a Chom­sky talk—in some small part, that is. Jil­lette believes that, absent most gov­ern­ment inter­fer­ence, we would have such a thing as a “true free mar­ket” in which every­one could com­pete fair­ly and with­out coer­cion. This is a posi­tion even Noz­ick soft­ened on many years after his clas­sic Anar­chy, State, and Utopia, call­ing it “seri­ous­ly inad­e­quate” and admit­ting that many demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions Lib­er­tar­i­ans want to abol­ish pre­serve “our equal human dig­ni­ty, our auton­o­my and pow­ers of self-direc­tion.”

What­ev­er we make of Jillette’s lais­sez faire ide­ol­o­gy, his cri­tiques of gov­ern­ment speak to Lib­er­tar­i­ans on either side of the eco­nom­ics divide. He makes an inci­sive case against Clin­ton, then tears into Trump’s will­ing­ness to “give easy answers.” Hold­ing up career politi­cians Bernie Sanders and Gary John­son as “paragons” may seem a bit much, giv­en Jillette’s force­ful argu­ment for a healthy and thor­ough­go­ing mis­trust of gov­ern­ment. As he says in the ear­li­er Big Think inter­view above, “part of the joy and the won­der and the bril­liance of the ideas of the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca that whoever’s in pow­er is ques­tioned and beat up.”

He does not, of course, mean that last part in any lit­er­al sense. While Lib­er­tar­i­an­ism has per­haps been tarred by asso­ci­a­tion with an increas­ing­ly vio­lent right, it would be a mis­take to lump Jil­lette in with cer­tain polit­i­cal oppor­tunists who at one time or anoth­er have used the term to describe them­selves. His com­mit­ment to anti-war and drug legal­iza­tion poli­cies is unwa­ver­ing, and he makes a strong, well-rea­soned case for his pol­i­tics. It’s one worth hear­ing out whether you agree or not in the end.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

6 Polit­i­cal The­o­rists Intro­duced in Ani­mat­ed “School of Life” Videos: Marx, Smith, Rawls & More

A The­o­ry of Jus­tice, the Musi­cal Imag­ines Philoso­pher John Rawls as a Time-Trav­el­ing Adven­tur­er

Noam Chom­sky on Whether the Rise of Trump Resem­bles the Rise of Fas­cism in 1930s Ger­many

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Carl Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928) Gets an Epic, Instrumental Soundtrack from the Indie Band Joan of Arc

The lega­cy of the silent film era is always with us, even as we move fur­ther and fur­ther away from film and clos­er to com­put­er art. Not only do the com­po­si­tions, cos­tum­ing, and cam­er­a­work of gold­en age clas­sics like Metrop­o­lis, Nos­fer­atu, The Cab­i­net of Dr. Cali­gari and oth­ers con­tin­ue to inform cur­rent direc­tors’ work, CGI and oth­er­wise, but these films have spawned their own pres­ti­gious form of music. In recent decades scores for clas­sic silents have become the spe­cial prove­nance of avant-garde and exper­i­men­tal com­posers. The pair­ing makes sense. These are movies that raised the stakes for their medi­um and estab­lished the first gen­er­a­tion of cin­e­mat­ic auteurs—Fritz Lang, F.W. Mur­nau, D.W. Grif­fith, Char­lie Chap­lin, and, of course, Carl Drey­er, the Dan­ish direc­tor of 1928’s pro­found­ly intense The Pas­sion of Joan of Arc.

As with all of the acknowl­edged clas­sics of the era, Dreyer’s mas­ter­piece has received many con­tem­po­rary musi­cal treat­ments in the past few decades, includ­ing an orig­i­nal operetta by Richard Ein­horn (on the Cri­te­ri­on Col­lec­tion edi­tion) and many more clas­si­cal and mod­ernist scores. But it has also been part of a par­al­lel trend—of indie rock musi­cians like Dengue Fever, Yo La Ten­go, Sparkle­horse, and Dean and Brit­ta scor­ing clas­sic silent films. First, Aus­tralians Nick Cave and The Dirty Three came togeth­er in 1995 to play a live sound­track for Joan of Arc in Lon­don. Then Cat Pow­er accom­pa­nied the film in 1999 for sev­er­al dates. In 2011, for one night only, Chica­go indie stal­warts Joan of Arc per­formed their 80-minute instru­men­tal score for a packed screen­ing at the Chica­go Inter­na­tion­al Movies and Music Fes­ti­val. Hear it, along with the film, above. (A copy can be pur­chased online here.) It was an “unex­pect­ed turn for the band,” their label Joy­ful Noise notes, giv­en that they had just “released their most con­ven­tion­al­ly ‘rock­ing’ album in years, ‘Life Like.’”

Asso­ci­at­ed with singer and sole per­ma­nent mem­ber Tim Kinsella’s raspy yelps and warped songcraft, the band here takes a post-rock direc­tion, loud and dirge-like. It may not be to everyone’s taste, but it does, writes Joy­ful Noise, offer a “dark, flow­er­ing son­ic coun­ter­part to the film’s grim sub­ject mat­ter (which is a rather haunt­ing depic­tion of sav­age reli­gious per­se­cu­tion).” Dreyer’s film is indeed a grim work of art, but it is not any less beau­ti­ful for its oppres­sive nar­ra­tive. As run­ning titles in the Joan of Arc-scored film’s intro inform us, like its pro­tag­o­nist, “The Pas­sion of Joan of Arc was the vic­tim of sev­er­al ordeals,” includ­ing cen­sor­ship upon release and the loss of the orig­i­nal neg­a­tive and a re-edit­ed copy to fire. Like­wise for the film’s actress, the great Renee Maria Fal­conet­ti, “the per­for­mance was an ordeal,” as Roger Ebert points out, with leg­ends telling “of Drey­er forc­ing her to kneel painful­ly on stone and then wipe all expres­sion from her face.”

Known “only in muti­lat­ed copies” for over half a cen­tu­ry, the 1985 restora­tion above comes from an orig­i­nal Dan­ish copy dis­cov­ered “com­plete and in very good con­di­tion” at a Nor­we­gian men­tal insti­tu­tion in 1981. It is a curi­ous sto­ry. Schol­ars have often spec­u­lat­ed that the his­tor­i­cal Joan of Arc was schiz­o­phrenic or that she suf­fered from “one of numer­ous neu­ro­log­i­cal and psy­chi­atric con­di­tions that trig­ger hal­lu­ci­na­tions or delu­sions.” Falconetti’s per­for­mance of Joan is ambigu­ous, sug­gest­ing on the one hand, a “faith that seemed to stay any sug­ges­tion of irri­ta­tion,” as one con­tem­po­rary review­er wrote, and on the oth­er, the dazed, far­away look of a per­son in the throes of men­tal ill­ness. And the film’s warped per­spec­tives and extreme close-ups and angles sug­gest a kind of dis­tur­bance, of the cor­rupt, super­sti­tious social order that inter­ro­gates and exe­cutes Joan, and also of Joan’s mind as she con­fronts her implaca­ble judges. Joan of Arc’s puls­ing, atmos­pher­ic sound­track, draws out this very ten­sion, writ­ten in Falconetti’s every exquis­ite expres­sion.

This ver­sion of Drey­er’s Joan of Arc will be added to our col­lec­tion, 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More. Anoth­er ver­sion, with­out any sound what­so­ev­er, can be found above.

Relat­ed Con­tent:  

Watch the Ger­man Expres­sion­ist Film, The Golem, with a Sound­track by The Pix­ies’ Black Fran­cis

Watch Online The Pas­sion of Joan of Arc by Carl Theodor Drey­er (1928) 

The 10 Great­est Films of All Time Accord­ing to 358 Film­mak­ers

Watch 10 Clas­sic Ger­man Expres­sion­ist Films: From Fritz Lang’s M to The Cab­i­net of Dr. Cali­gari

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

The Accidental Origin of the Hit Song ‘American Woman’: Randy Bachman Tells the Story

In one of our favorite old posts, gui­tarist Randy Bach­man did us a favor when he mer­ci­ful­ly demys­ti­fied the open­ing chord of The Bea­t­les’ ‘A Hard Day’s Night.’ Mys­tery final­ly solved.

Today, he returns and brings us inside the mak­ing of anoth­er clas­sic song–“Amer­i­can Woman,” which Bach­man co-wrote as a mem­ber of The Guess Who in 1970. In the clip above, the musi­cian reflects on his “anti­war protest song” and its mem­o­rable riff. You know it. It goes dum dum dada­da dada dada dada dum dum dada­da dada da dum. The riff came about by acci­dent, the hap­py byprod­uct of a bro­ken gui­tar string and some spur of the moment impro­vi­sa­tion. I’ll let Randy tell you the rest of the sto­ry.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Gui­tarist Randy Bach­man Demys­ti­fies the Open­ing Chord of The Bea­t­les’ ‘A Hard Day’s Night’

Pro­duc­er Tony Vis­con­ti Breaks Down the Mak­ing of David Bowie’s Clas­sic “Heroes,” Track by Track

Enter Bri­an Wilson’s Cre­ative Process While Mak­ing The Beach Boys’ Pet Sounds 50 Years Ago: A Fly-on-the Wall View

A 12-Hour Eastern Spirituality Playlist: Features Lectures & Readings by Joseph Campbell, Christopher Isherwood, the Dalai Lama & Others

800px-Bhagavata_Gita_Bishnupur_Arnab_Dutta_2011

Krish­na teach­ing Arju­na, from the Bha­ga­va­ta Gita, by Arnab Dut­ta, via Wiki­me­dia Com­mons

Open­ing with 19th cen­tu­ry British Prime Min­is­ter Ben­jamin Disraeli’s quote, “The East is a career,” Edward Said’s Ori­en­tal­ism traced the lin­eage of “the Ori­ent” as “almost a Euro­pean inven­tion.” Through dis­cours­es sci­en­tif­ic, polit­i­cal, philo­soph­i­cal, cul­tur­al, and oth­er­wise, Euro­pean thinkers, artists, and states­men, Said con­tend­ed, “accept­ed the basic dis­tinc­tion between East and West as the start­ing point for elab­o­rate the­o­ries, epics, nov­els, social descrip­tions and polit­i­cal accounts.” But at the root of a long aca­d­e­m­ic tra­di­tion of com­par­a­tive analy­ses of “East” and “West,”—a rela­tion­ship of dominance—there lay the recog­ni­tion, how­ev­er dim, that “The Ori­ent is not only adja­cent to Europe; it is also… the source of its civ­i­liza­tions and lan­guages.”

The cul­tur­al debts that Europe owed its colonies were not the kind of thing most politi­cians liked to dis­cuss, but many Euro­pean and U.S. writ­ers and schol­ars fas­ci­nat­ed with the East have long rec­og­nized reli­gious and philo­soph­i­cal con­ti­nu­ities between the two hemi­spheres. The num­ber of con­ver­sa­tions between so-called West­ern and East­ern tra­di­tions only increased as the 20th cen­tu­ry wore on and Euro­pean Empires crum­bled, giv­ing rise mid-cen­tu­ry to a whole soci­ety of com­par­a­tive East/West reli­gion­ists and writ­ers: D.T. Suzu­ki, Alan Watts, Her­man Hesse, Aldous Hux­ley, Allen Gins­berg.… Although many West­ern schol­ars’ pro­nounce­ments may have over­gen­er­al­ized or dis­tort­ed, inter­est in a dia­logue has only grown since the 50s and 60s, and sym­pa­thet­ic pre­sen­ta­tions of Bud­dhism, Tao­ism, Hin­duism, and oth­er “East­ern reli­gions” pro­lif­er­at­ed.

From this atmos­phere emerged the work of Joseph Camp­bell, famous for The Hero with a Thou­sand Faces, pub­lished in 1949, a work of com­par­a­tive reli­gion that adopt­ed a philo­log­i­cal approach to myth like that of Campbell’s own hero, Niet­zsche. Camp­bell may have seen East and West as dis­tinct cul­tur­al entities—titling one lec­ture “The East­ern Way” and anoth­er “The West­ern Quest”—but his the­o­ry did not allow for a strict cul­tur­al hier­ar­chy. In his many record­ed lec­tures, Camp­bell stress­es the sim­i­lar­i­ties and com­mon ori­gins of world tra­di­tions, which inhab­it, he says, a “sin­gle con­stel­la­tion.” We have a few of those talks in full in the 12 hour Spo­ti­fy playlist on East­ern Spir­i­tu­al­i­ty above, includ­ing lec­tures on “Imagery of Rebirth Yoga” and “Hin­duism,” deliv­ered in the late six­ties.

We also have Christo­pher Ish­er­wood read­ing selec­tions from his trans­la­tion with Swa­mi Prab­ha­vanan­da of the Bha­gavad-Gita. Isherwood’s famed embrace of Vedan­ta did much to fos­ter inter-reli­gious dia­logue, and he left behind a “tremen­dous cache of self-rev­e­la­to­ry works,” writes Amer­i­can Vedan­tist, “includ­ing essays, lec­tures, nov­els, his diaries, and the auto­bi­o­graph­i­cal My Guru and His Dis­ci­ple.” Next to Camp­bell and Ish­er­wood, we have Tibetan Bud­dhist author­i­ty the Dalai Lama giv­ing an intro­duc­to­ry lec­ture on Bud­dhism and a talk on “Cul­ti­vat­ing Hap­pi­ness.” Round­ing out the playlist is anoth­er intro­duc­tion to Bud­dhism by Emma Hignett, a read­ing of the Tao te Ching, and a read­ing by Robert Hamil­ton of his fas­ci­nat­ing com­par­a­tive study of world reli­gions, Caduceus.

While each of us could, of course, take it upon our­selves to learn San­skrit, or Pali, or Chi­nese, trans­late ancient reli­gious lit­er­a­ture and draw our own con­clu­sions, we can also par­take of the work of schol­ars and writ­ers who have invest­ed deeply in their sub­ject, per­son­al­ly and pro­fes­sion­al­ly, and returned with a great deal of wis­dom about glob­al spir­i­tu­al tra­di­tions. The lec­tures on this playlist (if you need Spo­ti­fy’s free soft­ware, down­load it here) offer an excel­lent sam­pling of that wis­dom and schol­ar­ship. You’ll find much more on our site in work by Jorge Luis Borges, Alan Watts, Robert Thur­man, the Dalai Lama, Her­bie Han­cock, Son­ny Rollins, Leonard Cohen, and many more.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Free Online Reli­gion Cours­es

Mar­tin Hei­deg­ger Talks Phi­los­o­phy with a Bud­dhist Monk on Ger­man Tele­vi­sion (1963)

The Wis­dom of Alan Watts in Four Thought-Pro­vok­ing Ani­ma­tions

The Dalai Lama’s Intro­duc­tion to Bud­dhism

48 Hours of Joseph Camp­bell Lec­tures Free Online: The Pow­er of Myth & Sto­ry­telling

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness.

The History of Photography in Five Animated Minutes: From Camera Obscura to Camera Phone

We find our­selves, still ear­ly in the 21st cen­tu­ry, in an unprece­dent­ed era in the his­to­ry of pho­tog­ra­phy. The con­sumers of the devel­oped world have, of course, had access to cam­eras of their own for decades and decades, but now almost each and every one of us walks around with a cam­era in our pock­et. When a par­tic­u­lar land­scape, build­ing, ani­mal, human being, or oth­er sight strikes our fan­cy, we cap­ture it with­out a momen­t’s hes­i­ta­tion — and, often, with­out hav­ing giv­en a momen­t’s thought to the tech­no­log­i­cal and artis­tic his­to­ry of the dis­ci­pline we are, if for lit­tle more than an instant, prac­tic­ing.

Most of us, know­ing our­selves to be no Ansel Adams, Hen­ri Carti­er-Bres­son, or Diane Arbus, would hes­i­tate to describe the snaps with which we doc­u­ment and share our dai­ly lives as “pho­tog­ra­phy.” But in tak­ing any pic­ture, no mat­ter how mun­dane or even sil­ly, we place our­selves in the stream of a tra­di­tion. But we can gain an under­stand­ing of that tra­di­tion, at least in broad strokes, from “The His­to­ry of Pho­tog­ra­phy in Five Min­utes,” the Coop­er­a­tive of Pho­tog­ra­phy video above which, in the words of its nar­ra­tor, offers an insight into — brace your­self for this and oth­er puns —  “how pho­tog­ra­phy has devel­oped.”

Begin­ning with the cam­era obscu­ra, the reflec­tion and trac­ing devices that date back to antiq­ui­ty (lat­er described and used by Leonar­do da Vin­ci), the video moves swift­ly from mile­stone to pho­to­graph­ic mile­stone, includ­ing the first pho­to­graph, a “heli­o­graph” tak­en in 1826; Louis Daguer­re’s inven­tion of “the first prac­ti­cal pho­to­graph­ic process” in 1833; the first self­ie, tak­en in 1839; the emer­gence of mobile pho­to stu­dios in the 1850s; Ead­weard Muy­bridge’s motion-pho­tog­ra­phy stud­ies of the 1870s; Kodak’s pro­duc­tion of the first roll-film con­sumer cam­era in 1888; the game-chang­ing Leica I hit­ting the mar­ket in 1925; the first sin­gle-lens reflex in 1949; the first dig­i­tal cam­era in 1975; and, open­ing our own era, the first cam­era phone in 2000.

And now our smart­phones and their “insane­ly pow­er­ful cam­eras” onboard have turned pho­tog­ra­phy into a “glob­al pas­sion” that “has tru­ly brought the world clos­er togeth­er.” The pro­lif­er­a­tion of hasti­ly tak­en, essen­tial­ly uncom­posed shots of our pur­chas­es, our food, and our­selves have giv­en old-school pho­tog­ra­phy enthu­si­asts plen­ty to com­plain about, but the era of acces­si­ble pho­tog­ra­phy has only just begun. Most of us are still, in some sense, tak­ing heli­ographs and daguerreo­types; just imag­ine how the next fif­teen years will, er, expose our true pho­to­graph­ic capa­bil­i­ties.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Ansel Adams Reveals His Cre­ative Process in 1958 Doc­u­men­tary

How to Take Pho­tographs Like Ansel Adams: The Mas­ter Explains The Art of “Visu­al­iza­tion”

Hen­ri Carti­er-Bres­son and the Deci­sive Moment

Alfred Stieglitz: The Elo­quent Eye, a Reveal­ing Look at “The Father of Mod­ern Pho­tog­ra­phy”

1972 Diane Arbus Doc­u­men­tary Inter­views Those Who Knew the Amer­i­can Pho­tog­ra­ph­er Best

Get­ty Images Makes 35 Mil­lion Pho­tos Free to Use Online

Hunter S. Thompson’s Advice for Aspir­ing Pho­tog­ra­phers: Skip the Fan­cy Equip­ment & Just Shoot

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities and cul­ture. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­ma, the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future?, and the Los Ange­les Review of Books’ Korea Blog. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

The Hidden Secrets in “Daydreaming,” Paul Thomas Anderson’s New Radiohead Music Video

Paul Thomas Ander­son, as his fans will tell you, makes the kind of large-scale cin­e­ma nobody else does any­more: intense of emo­tion, involved of sto­ry, col­or­ful­ly pop­u­lat­ed, wide of aspect ratio (and even, in the case of The Mas­ter, shot on 70-mil­lime­ter film), no super­heroes asked, none giv­en. Hav­ing dis­played unwa­ver­ing com­mit­ment to his visions from the very begin­ning, it makes sense that, on his lat­est music video, he would work with Radio­head, a band no less com­mit­ted to their own. Radio­head fans know the ambi­tious­ness of a Radio­head song or album when they hear it, but what makes the video Ander­son direct­ed for “Day­dream­ing,” their sin­gle released this past May, Ander­son­ian?

“Like many great works of art, Radio­head­’s lat­est music video makes you strug­gle for its inner mean­ing,” says Rishi Kane­r­ia in his explana­to­ry video “Radio­head: the Secrets of ‘Day­dream­ing.’ ” His nar­ra­tion describes the video’s osten­si­bly sim­ple form: “an old­er, tired-look­ing Thom Yorke” — Radio­head­’s singer and co-founder — “open­ing door after door, and like a ghost, walk­ing through the back­ground of seem­ing­ly ran­dom peo­ple’s lives,” all “a metaphor for the choic­es Thom has had to make in his life, of the doors he’s stepped through, while nev­er quite know­ing what’s on the oth­er side. Because he can nev­er go back, we see him con­stant­ly push­ing for­ward, con­tin­u­al­ly search­ing for mean­ing and an ulti­mate rest­ing place. ”

Kane­r­ia keys in on details that only those with a thor­ough knowl­edge of the life and work of Yorke and his band could notice. In real life, Yorke had just split up with his part­ner of 23 years; in the video, he walks through 23 doors. In the video, he wears an out­fit designed by Rick Owens; in real life, his part­ner was named Rachel Owens. (Well, Rachel Owen, but close enough.) The var­i­ous rooms through which York pass­es con­tain women, usu­al­ly moth­ers, even in a hos­pi­tal ward. Can we con­sid­er that a ref­er­ence to his recu­per­a­tion from a “severe car crash in 1987, espe­cial­ly con­sid­er­ing there’s a wheel on the wall”?

When Yorke’s char­ac­ter final­ly finds solace beside a fire in a cave, he speaks a back­wards phrase to the cam­era which, reversed, sounds like, “Half of my life, half of my love.” 23 years, of course, con­sti­tutes just about half of the 47-year-old Yorke’s life — and, Kane­r­ia notes, the num­ber of years since the band began record­ing. The video also per­forms oth­er exege­ses numer­i­cal, lyri­cal, and visu­al, and zodi­a­cal, every­where find­ing ref­er­ences to Rachel as well as to Radio­head — song titles, album art, even the set­tings of past music videos — to the point that we see “how Thom’s per­son­al life with Rachel is inescapably sat­u­rat­ed and sur­round­ed by all things Radio­head.”

Nobody ever called bal­anc­ing the demands of domes­tic life and those of per­haps the biggest rock band in the world easy. Still, few recent works of art have illus­trat­ed this kind of strug­gle as vivid­ly as the “Day­dream­ing” video, and Ander­son, not just one of the most famous and respect­ed film­mak­ers alive but a hus­band and a father to four chil­dren, sure­ly knows some­thing about it as well. So often com­pared to his cin­e­ma-redefin­ing pre­de­ces­sors from Robert Alt­man to Stan­ley Kubrick, he must also know as well as Yorke does what it means to have your work sub­ject­ed to such close scruti­ny — and to want to cre­ate work that will repay that scruti­ny.

The Ander­son-Radio­head con­nec­tion goes as least as far back as 2007’s There Will Be Blood, scored by the band’s gui­tarist Jon­ny Green­wood. Ander­son com­mis­sioned Green­wood’s musi­cal ser­vices again for his next two pic­tures, The Mas­ter, and Inher­ent Vice, and last year made a doc­u­men­tary called Jun­jun about Green­wood’s solo album of the same name. No mat­ter how much of Kane­r­i­a’s pre­sent­ed rev­e­la­tion you believe, “Day­dream­ing” sits as suit­ably with the rest of Ander­son­’s fil­mog­ra­phy as it does in its treat­ment of an old theme: you can’t enjoy every kind of sat­is­fac­tion — but from the life­long bat­tle to do so, most­ly against one­self, emerges art.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Delight in Prince’s Extra­or­di­nar­i­ly Poignant Cov­er of Radiohead’s “Creep” & His Com­plete 2008 Coachel­la Set

How Paul Thomas Ander­son Dropped Out of NYU Film School in 2 Days; Stud­ied Lit­er­a­ture with David Fos­ter Wal­lace

Radiohead’s “Creep” Per­formed in a Vin­tage Jazz-Age Style

Michel Gondry’s Finest Music Videos for Björk, Radio­head & More: The Last of the Music Video Gods

Radio­head-Approved, Fan-Made Film of the Band at Rose­land for 2011′s The King of Limbs Tour

Radiohead’s Thom Yorke Gives Teenage Girls Endear­ing Advice About Boys (And Much More)

Radio­head: Mak­ing Videos With­out Cam­eras (or Lights)

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities and cul­ture. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­ma, the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future?, and the Los Ange­les Review of Books’ Korea Blog. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

Prof. Brian Cox Has a Maddening Conversation with a Climate Science-Denying Politician

Accord­ing to NASA’s God­dard Insti­tute for Space Stud­ies, July 2016 was the warmest month ever record­ed. 2016 will like­ly be the warmest year on record. And the decades ahead will only get worse, much worse.

And yet, notes physi­cist Lawrence Krauss in The New York­er this week­end, we have the GOP’s Franken­stein try­ing to dem­a­gogue his way into the pres­i­den­cy by call­ing cli­mate sci­ence into ques­tion. Krauss writes:

In May, for instance, while speak­ing to an audi­ence of West Vir­ginia coal min­ers, Trump com­plained that reg­u­la­tions designed to pro­tect the ozone lay­er had com­pro­mised the qual­i­ty of his hair spray. Those reg­u­la­tions, he con­tin­ued, were mis­guid­ed, because hair spray is used main­ly indoors, and so can have no effect on the atmos­phere out­side.…

Often, Trump is sim­ply wrong about sci­ence, even though he should know bet­ter. Just as he was a per­sis­tent “birther” even after the evi­dence con­vinc­ing­ly showed that Pres­i­dent Oba­ma was born in the Unit­ed States, Trump now con­tin­ues to prop­a­gate the notion that vac­cines cause autism in spite of con­vinc­ing and wide­ly cit­ed evi­dence to the con­trary… In oth­er cas­es, Trump treats sci­en­tif­ic facts the way he treats oth­er facts—he ignores or dis­torts them when­ev­er it’s con­ve­nient. He has denied that cli­mate change is real, call­ing it pseu­do­science and advanc­ing a con­spir­a­cy the­o­ry that “the con­cept of glob­al warm­ing was cre­at­ed by and for the Chi­nese in order to make U.S. man­u­fac­tur­ing non­com­pet­i­tive.”

And way across the pond, we have anoth­er politi­cian, Aus­tralian Sen­a­tor Mal­colm Roberts, mak­ing his own kind of laugh­able claims. In a recent tele­vi­sion broad­cast, Roberts asks physi­cist Bri­an Cox for empir­i­cal proof that cli­mate change exists. Cox offers evi­dence gath­ered by NASA, to which Roberts responds, NASA’s “data has been cor­rupt­ed and manip­u­lat­ed.” Not good enough. If you reg­u­lar­ly read our site, you know that this is not the first time that NASA has been accused of manip­u­lat­ing data. Con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists have long accused NASA and Stan­ley Kubrick of fak­ing the moon land­ing in 1969. Roberts bris­tles at being asso­ci­at­ed with these loons. But frankly it’s an apt com­par­i­son. And if any­one should be both­ered by the com­par­i­son, it’s the moon land­ing con­spir­acists. How­ev­er strange their the­o­ries might be, no one doubts that they’re heart­felt, gen­uine, and seem­ing­ly free from the hint of polit­i­cal and finan­cial influ­ence.

In the mean­time, in a new video from NASA, you can see the Arc­tic ice lev­els retreat­ing to one of the low­est lev­els in record­ed his­to­ry. Call the video “cor­rupt­ed” and “manip­u­lat­ed” at your own per­il.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Glob­al Warm­ing: A Free Course from UChica­go Explains Cli­mate Change

Michio Kaku & Noam Chom­sky School Moon Land­ing and 9/11 Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rists

Carl Sagan Presents His “Baloney Detec­tion Kit”: 8 Tools for Skep­ti­cal Think­ing

Richard Feyn­man Cre­ates a Sim­ple Method for Telling Sci­ence From Pseu­do­science (1966)

Sal­ly Ride Warns Against Glob­al Warm­ing; Won­ders If Tech­nol­o­gy Can Save Us From Our­selves

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 5 ) |

Behold the Very First Color Photograph (1861): Taken by Scottish Physicist (and Poet!) James Clerk Maxwell

color-tartan-ribbon_1376_990x742

Since its ancient ori­gins as the cam­era obscu­ra, the pho­to­graph­ic cam­era has always mim­ic­ked the human eye, allow­ing light to enter an aper­ture, then pro­ject­ing an image upside down. Renais­sance artists relied on the cam­era obscu­ra to sharp­en their own visu­al per­spec­tives. But it wasn’t until photography—the abil­i­ty to repro­duce the obscu­ra’s images—that the rudi­men­ta­ry arti­fi­cial eye began evolv­ing the same com­plex struc­tures we rely on for our own visu­al acu­ity: lens­es for sharp­ness, vari­able aper­tures, shut­ter speeds, focus con­trols…. Only when it began to seem that pho­tog­ra­phy might vie with the oth­er fine arts did the devel­op­ment of cam­era tech­nol­o­gy take off. And it moved quick­ly.

Between the time of the first pho­to­graph in 1826 by Joseph Nicéphore Niépce and 1861, pho­tog­ra­phy had advanced suf­fi­cient­ly that physi­cist James Clerk Maxwell—known for his “Maxwell’s Demon” thought experiment—produced the first col­or pho­to­graph that did not imme­di­ate­ly fade or require hand paint­ing (above). The Scot­tish sci­en­tist chose to take a pic­ture of a tar­tan rib­bon, “cre­at­ed,” writes Nation­al Geo­graph­ic, “by pho­tograph­ing it three times through red, blue, and yel­low fil­ters, then recom­bin­ing the images into one col­or com­pos­ite.” Maxwell’s three-col­or method was intend­ed to mim­ic the way the eye process­es col­or, based on the­o­ries he had elab­o­rat­ed in an 1855 paper.

Duhauron1877

Maxwell’s many oth­er accom­plish­ments tend to over­shad­ow his col­or pho­tog­ra­phy (and his poet­ry!). Nonethe­less, the poly­math thinker ush­ered in a rev­o­lu­tion in pho­to­graph­ic repro­duc­tion, almost as an aside. “It’s easy to for­get, “ writes BBC pic­ture edi­tor, Phil Coomes, “that not long ago news agen­cies were trans­mit­ting their wire pho­tographs as colour sep­a­ra­tions, usu­al­ly cyan, magen­ta and yellow—a process that relied on Clerk Maxwell’s dis­cov­ery. Indeed even the lat­est dig­i­tal cam­era relies on the sep­a­ra­tion method to cap­ture light.” And yet, com­pared to the usu­al speed of pho­to­graph­ic advance­ment, the process took some time to ful­ly refine.

Maxwell cre­at­ed the image with the help of pho­tog­ra­ph­er Thomas Sut­ton, inven­tor of the sin­gle lens reflex cam­era, but his inter­est lay prin­ci­pal­ly in its demon­stra­tion of his col­or the­o­ry, not its appli­ca­tion to pho­tog­ra­phy in gen­er­al. Six­teen years lat­er, the repro­duc­tion of col­or had not advanced sig­nif­i­cant­ly, though a sub­trac­tive method allowed more sub­tle­ty of light and shade, as you can see in the 1877 exam­ple above by Louis Ducos du Hau­ron. Even so, these nine­teenth images still can­not com­pete for vibran­cy and life­like­ness with hand-col­ored pho­tos from the peri­od. Despite appear­ing arti­fi­cial, hand-tint­ed images like these of 1860s Samu­rai Japan brought a star­tling imme­di­a­cy to their sub­jects in a way that ear­ly col­or pho­tog­ra­phy did not.

Sarah Acland

It wasn’t until the ear­ly 20th century—with the devel­op­ment of col­or process­es by Gabriel Lipp­man and the Sanger Shep­herd company—that col­or came into its own. Leo Tol­stoy appeared ear­ly in the cen­tu­ry in bril­liant full col­or pho­tos. Paris came alive in col­or images dur­ing WWI. And Sarah Angeli­na Acland, a pio­neer­ing Eng­lish pho­tog­ra­ph­er, took the image above in 1900 above using the Sanger Shep­herd method. That process—patented, mar­ket­ed, and sold—thoroughly improved upon Maxwell’s results, but its basic oper­a­tion was near­ly the same: three images, red, green, and blue, com­bined into one.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Hand-Col­ored 1860s Pho­tographs Reveal the Last Days of Samu­rai Japan

The First Col­or Por­trait of Leo Tol­stoy, and Oth­er Amaz­ing Col­or Pho­tos of Czarist Rus­sia (1908)

Venice in Beau­ti­ful Col­or Images 125 Years Ago: The Rial­to Bridge, St. Mark’s Basil­i­ca, Doge’s Palace & More

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness


  • Great Lectures

  • Sign up for Newsletter

  • About Us

    Open Culture scours the web for the best educational media. We find the free courses and audio books you need, the language lessons & educational videos you want, and plenty of enlightenment in between.


    Advertise With Us

  • Archives

  • Search

  • Quantcast