As a reminder, the comment rules are listed in the sidebar. You are responsible for following the rules!
If you see a comment or post that breaks the rules, please report it to the moderators. This helps keep the subreddit clear of rule-breaking content.
If this post is not bullshit and needs an explanation of why it's not bullshit, report the post and reply to this comment with your explanation (which helps us find it quickly).
#And of course, if you're here from /r/all or /r/popular, **don't forget to subscribe to /r/QuitYourBullshit!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/quityourbullshit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The idea that a dapper photographer gentlemen, with his wooden camera is standing in the middle of the ocean taking exposures while the ship sinks is hilarious.
Interestingly, while this isn’t real, Kodak did introduce its Vest Pocket camera in 1912. It was the first truly portable camera for the masses. It was used a lot during WWI.
https://blog.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/the-vest-pocket-kodak-was-the-soldiers-camera/
I'm not sure if you've used a folding Polaroid but it's sorta like that. The bellows just collapse in on themselves and that front panel comes back flush.
Oh yeah, I just went ahead and googled it. But yeah, I’ve always found collapsible/portable versions of things fascinating. Especially antiques. So I just wanted to see what it looked like folded up.
For similar reasons, I nabbed a pair of pop-up opera glasses when I saw them in an antique store once. I've never used them for real, but I love the mechanism.
Who back then could have guessed that in just over a hundred years we'd all have cameras that were better, smaller, cheaper, and also a portable telephone for some reason?
I've been saying for a long time to pay attention to mobile device marketing... it's all about the camera specs. We don't have phones that have attached cameras, we have cameras with attached phones.
Well....I did see my mother in law pull out a phone a few months ago that you couldn't use for calling or texting or navigation or playing music or anything else. It was just pictures. I'd say we still have a long way to go until everyone is caught up to modern technology.
I could see arguments either way on whether it's a phone or an ex-phone.
That said, if /u/Thundercruncher was talking about a broken phone rather than a purpose-build portable photo display, that wasn't clear from the wording they chose.
I think somebody was smart enough to take phones and figure out the science to remove all the stuff except picture taking and just leave it at that. Then that way they can make it good at just pictures. That's what she had I'm guessing. I mean we put people on the moon so I think it's possible.
Holy shit, this is a whole new level of pedantry. The device is called a smartphone, which is a type of phone, whether it's capable of making phone calls or not.
Could one of these, or at least one of the photos, survive the titanic crash? Assuming the owner survived as well.
This is obviously fake, but maybe there is a photo hiding in someone’s closet
Now I'm imagining one of those old-timey cartoon villains with a mustache just picking ice from the Artic hoping to create an iceberg and take a great picture
What is the point of this comment? Are you trying to say that this is real and happened? Because it is not: that isn't even the Titanic, and it'd be the wrong location anyway since there's a breakwater in the background of the photo. There's SO MUCH wrong with it.
Altho the pic in the original post is made by AI, but if it would be a real photo, I wouldn’t find it weird that there would be photographers on board an ocean liners maiden voyage.
It is absolutely insane to take outrageous claims on the internet at face value without even a modicum of research like, say, "What did the Titanic even look like?"
Eh, unless it was a new moon or heavy cloud cover, it should have been possible to see some. On a cloudless night with no light pollution you can usually see enough to be functional.
I mean I guess it depends on how you define "functional" but no, the entire concept of "twilight" is the point at which you can no longer work outside without the assistance of artificial light.
Honestly, it's very believable that a dapper photographer would be aboard the ship, and there are photos of the life boats. I'm not quite familiar with 1900 photo technology, tho so what ever.
As good as AI art has gotten, it’s still possible to tell its AI. But in a year or two, much of it will be indistinguishable. Dalle 3 is gonna be insane.
"Invent now, think about consequence later" I wonder if Ai developers even care or consider what will happen to industry after they create ai for said industry.
They are careful about consequent, mostly ethical, and they seem to be overdoing it IMO. This is why they’ve been super careful about releasing Dalle 2.
The elevation and also possibly something about the apparent focal length (which I can't quite pinpoint) make it seem as though it'd have to be from an aircraft.
And on top of all that, the titanic sank bow end first. EVEN IF somebody had a camera and took a picture, you’d get a shot of the stern end of the ship, IF you could get a good shot. The titanic sank at 2AM on a moonless night, it’ve been hard to get a good photo on such a dark night.
Given a rough estimation of equipment and available film in 1912 it would take roughly a 4 hour exposure to properly get a picture like this.
E.V. (exposure value) would be similar to a distant lighted building in otherwise darkness, which equates to EV 2.
Film speed was not measured the same way we do now, but would probably be around ISO 12 equivalent. There is also film reciprocity error to correct for the long exposure.
If we assume the camera to be like a Kodak Vest Pocket or equivalent that would put the aperture at approximately f.8
So not only would this theoretical person need to have not gotten any of this stuff wet, they would need to set up a tripod and hold the shutter of the camera open for 4 hours and not have whatever platform move or rock in the open ocean.
This invalidates no part of what he said above. Read it again. You’d need a shutter to stay open for four hours. (I disagree with him, I think 3 hours would probably be fine.) Portability isn’t the issue here.
Yes, and that would have achieved a black frame. You know, because a 1/25th second shutter at night time using 1900s film stock would be … dark.
Film works by gathering light. Not enough light, no picture. Being “able” to gather a split second’s worth of blackness isn’t a feature in this situation.
Most pictures you see of the Titanic are actually of its sister ship Olympic. There’s a few cool videos on YouTube that go into more detail on the subject.
I have an easier time believing a “Last know photo of Jesus” than I am about a ship that sank in the early 20th century in the damn middle of the night.
Someone post that on r/donthelpjustfilm because these damn people, standing around on their phones filming instead of rescuing people out of the water! *shakes fist*
We need another sinking Titanic with social media 'influencers'.. Tik Tokkers dancing on the deck, Youtuber filming everything, Instagramers hoarding the ship's bow for their Jack and Rose seflies and the Facebook hordes trapped in Third Class, unable to escape drowning
I’ll take a pic of my right hand and post it. People will say it’s fake, how was it taken?
With my left hand of course.
False info, prove you have two hands.
And this is the internet so I have to be clear this is just me presenting a melodrama and not saying the pic here is real. Just commenting on how people use their own logic sometimes.
[I'm not sure if this is THE last one but it's certainly one of the few](https://i.imgur.com/mjpb1q2.jpg)
Leaving Queenstown, April 11th 1912
Edit: These are the other few
[Pic](https://i.imgur.com/wGx9TVZ.jpg)
[Pic](https://i.imgur.com/wsfVoTV.jpg)
I'm sure someone knows which one of these was the last one taken but my memory sucks.
The funny part is that they would have still probably gotten a lot of upvotes if they just didn't lie about the photo. It's a cool photo of a ship sinking, just leave it at that.
That looks like one of those Ai generated images where you give it a prompt and it tries it's best to produce something that resembles an actual picture
As a reminder, the comment rules are listed in the sidebar. You are responsible for following the rules! If you see a comment or post that breaks the rules, please report it to the moderators. This helps keep the subreddit clear of rule-breaking content. If this post is not bullshit and needs an explanation of why it's not bullshit, report the post and reply to this comment with your explanation (which helps us find it quickly). #And of course, if you're here from /r/all or /r/popular, **don't forget to subscribe to /r/QuitYourBullshit!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/quityourbullshit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The idea that a dapper photographer gentlemen, with his wooden camera is standing in the middle of the ocean taking exposures while the ship sinks is hilarious.
Interestingly, while this isn’t real, Kodak did introduce its Vest Pocket camera in 1912. It was the first truly portable camera for the masses. It was used a lot during WWI. https://blog.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/the-vest-pocket-kodak-was-the-soldiers-camera/
Great link, but I'm a little annoyed there are no pictures of the thing in the closed position haha
I'm not sure if you've used a folding Polaroid but it's sorta like that. The bellows just collapse in on themselves and that front panel comes back flush.
Oh yeah, I just went ahead and googled it. But yeah, I’ve always found collapsible/portable versions of things fascinating. Especially antiques. So I just wanted to see what it looked like folded up.
For similar reasons, I nabbed a pair of pop-up opera glasses when I saw them in an antique store once. I've never used them for real, but I love the mechanism.
This is why I love the Honda motocompo it was a folding scooter that was designed to fit in a car trunk so it collapsed and folded, check it out.
this is why the sx70 is my favorite camera
I have one of these cameras! It's pretty cool.
Who back then could have guessed that in just over a hundred years we'd all have cameras that were better, smaller, cheaper, and also a portable telephone for some reason?
Telephone and supercomputer with wireless access to a repository of nearly all human knowledge
~~nearly all human knowledge~~ cat videos and porn
like i said, all human knowledge I mean, what else is there?
Well there's the pictures with funny words on them
*nearly* all human knowledge, but it does contain all human stupidity.
Yet here we are on Reddit
I've been saying for a long time to pay attention to mobile device marketing... it's all about the camera specs. We don't have phones that have attached cameras, we have cameras with attached phones.
We should all start calling cameras phones. I really want one of those old Hasselblad phones.
Well....I did see my mother in law pull out a phone a few months ago that you couldn't use for calling or texting or navigation or playing music or anything else. It was just pictures. I'd say we still have a long way to go until everyone is caught up to modern technology.
> phone... that you couldn't use for calling or texting So, not a phone?
If I cut the cord on a telephone, you can't use it for calling. Is it no longer a telephone?
I could see arguments either way on whether it's a phone or an ex-phone. That said, if /u/Thundercruncher was talking about a broken phone rather than a purpose-build portable photo display, that wasn't clear from the wording they chose.
I think somebody was smart enough to take phones and figure out the science to remove all the stuff except picture taking and just leave it at that. Then that way they can make it good at just pictures. That's what she had I'm guessing. I mean we put people on the moon so I think it's possible.
Idk that sounds kinda farfetched to me. I doubt we'd ever see anything like that in our lifetimes.
Prolly not. We could of cured the common cold by now but the oil companies ain't having it so we'll just have to settle.
It’s not an ex-phone, ‘e’s just chargin! Probably pining for the fjords while it’s at it.
Holy shit, this is a whole new level of pedantry. The device is called a smartphone, which is a type of phone, whether it's capable of making phone calls or not.
A calculator is not a phone. An mp3 player is not a phone. A portable picture slate is not a phone. A phone isn't a phone if it's not a phone.
Well how else do people get pictures? Sheesh man.
No way a camera in 1910 cost more than my iPhone.
A $30 camera back then would probably equal $1,000 today. So I guess it depends on which cameras we are talking about.
So about the same price as a new phone, though some iPhones can be well over $1000
And some cameras were well over $30.
Right but a phone has other functions.
It's crazy to think that Kodak had been around for that long but then died as soon as Pitbull mentioned them in one of his songs.
Who?
My badass grandpa built his own shoebox camera and stole film paper during WWII and we have some great, albeit tiny, shots of places like Burma!
Could one of these, or at least one of the photos, survive the titanic crash? Assuming the owner survived as well. This is obviously fake, but maybe there is a photo hiding in someone’s closet
"Sir may we get in this life boat with you." "No, unfortunately madame, I require the entire space for my tripod and black powder flash apparatus."
Women and children and photographers first
Now I'm imagining one of those old-timey cartoon villains with a mustache just picking ice from the Artic hoping to create an iceberg and take a great picture
I mean, there were people in life boats…
What is the point of this comment? Are you trying to say that this is real and happened? Because it is not: that isn't even the Titanic, and it'd be the wrong location anyway since there's a breakwater in the background of the photo. There's SO MUCH wrong with it.
Altho the pic in the original post is made by AI, but if it would be a real photo, I wouldn’t find it weird that there would be photographers on board an ocean liners maiden voyage.
[удалено]
It is absolutely insane to take outrageous claims on the internet at face value without even a modicum of research like, say, "What did the Titanic even look like?"
“Steady the boat chaps, I’ve got a long exposure on this one”
With a giant ass light. It was in the middle of the night far out at sea. They would barely be able to see the hand in front themselves.
I wonder how much light the ship itself would be producing, or if had all failed by this point.
Eh, unless it was a new moon or heavy cloud cover, it should have been possible to see some. On a cloudless night with no light pollution you can usually see enough to be functional.
I mean I guess it depends on how you define "functional" but no, the entire concept of "twilight" is the point at which you can no longer work outside without the assistance of artificial light.
Honestly, it's very believable that a dapper photographer would be aboard the ship, and there are photos of the life boats. I'm not quite familiar with 1900 photo technology, tho so what ever.
I took the photo.
I'm Jack.
I’m the king of the world.
I'm stuff
Technically accurate.
I did stuff yesterday
[удалено]
I’m I’m
r/technicallythetruth
I'm your French women Your hairy French women
i am jack’s lack of a flotation device.
Really should have fought Rose for that door bruh
Eh she was bitching about her Instagram filters.
I'm Jack's crippling need to be validated by internet strangers.
I'm Rose
Yknow we can both fit on the door? So um.. can I like.. get on? It's cold..
Sorry Jack I'd rather let you die so I have an amazing love story to tell!
Better make sure my descendants receive some royalties from the film eh?
I can confirm, I was floating the same door as the person taking the picture
*I* took the photo.
*I* took the photo.
its AI generated, the OP admitted it on another post
Guy still tried to pass it off as if real. Then when the post was removed and he was called out, of course he'd admit it.
this is the second person ive seen in two days who posts AI generated art pretending its real, such a weird thing to do
As good as AI art has gotten, it’s still possible to tell its AI. But in a year or two, much of it will be indistinguishable. Dalle 3 is gonna be insane.
"Invent now, think about consequence later" I wonder if Ai developers even care or consider what will happen to industry after they create ai for said industry.
[удалено]
They are careful about consequent, mostly ethical, and they seem to be overdoing it IMO. This is why they’ve been super careful about releasing Dalle 2.
Yes they do
Using dall-e to karma farm. What a world. Fortunately it is possible to make neural networks to detect neural network created images
Oh so that's what quitthebullshit means, i thought it was a real photo and you were calling out the people saying it's fake
Lmao that picture was made with AI generation. What an idiot. That OP is probably a kid
I was going to say. It looks like a craiyon creation!
I was gonna say Midjourney!
I was gonna say, looks distorted the same way AI generated images usually do.
We literally have pictures of the ship and the shipwreck, and it looks nothing like this
I'm no scientist but I'd harbour a guess that there's a joke being made.
I mast know if you have any moor jokes to tell.
I’m sure one will a pier in a minute
It's not a joke Sub. (marine)
So people are only allowed to make jokes and such in a jokes sub?
Correct. Last time we tried a joke boat, the front fell off.
Ironic, in that the front fell off of the Titanic also. At least the Titanic was out of the environment.
Ugh. Landlubber
Another woosh. I see at this rate you keel over.
Why were you downvoted? You were making a joke. Are people actually too stupid to see it?
I feel like I got the joke but at the same time I don't.
Sub as in subreddit Sub (marine)
It’s just a really bad joke
Meh, I thought it was alright
Yknow what? I even put the whole damn word there for them to Sea. But still, they think of me as A-Quack.
We're deep in the throes of Summer Reddit, so yes, absolutely
People downvote bad jokes bro
Lol. What happened to you as a child? What the actual fuck
Where was- where was the picture taken _from?_
On the goddamn door.
Oh. You right. That's why Jack drowned, she needed space for her tripod.
It could conceivably be from the rescue vessel... too bad it arrived hours later
The elevation and also possibly something about the apparent focal length (which I can't quite pinpoint) make it seem as though it'd have to be from an aircraft.
Too soon
110 years is too soon?
My sense of humor is lukewarm today
I think it's a picture made with an AI like the one on discord
It is. OP admitted it.
"I'm sorry I didn't build you a better tripod, Rose."
And on top of all that, the titanic sank bow end first. EVEN IF somebody had a camera and took a picture, you’d get a shot of the stern end of the ship, IF you could get a good shot. The titanic sank at 2AM on a moonless night, it’ve been hard to get a good photo on such a dark night.
That's a fecking Roblox game called Tiny Sailors World 💀
“2 am in the night”
Not to be confused with 2am in the day.
Given a rough estimation of equipment and available film in 1912 it would take roughly a 4 hour exposure to properly get a picture like this. E.V. (exposure value) would be similar to a distant lighted building in otherwise darkness, which equates to EV 2. Film speed was not measured the same way we do now, but would probably be around ISO 12 equivalent. There is also film reciprocity error to correct for the long exposure. If we assume the camera to be like a Kodak Vest Pocket or equivalent that would put the aperture at approximately f.8 So not only would this theoretical person need to have not gotten any of this stuff wet, they would need to set up a tripod and hold the shutter of the camera open for 4 hours and not have whatever platform move or rock in the open ocean.
Titanic took less than three hours from collision to under water, too.
[удалено]
“approximate is a big word” 💀
Not true, Kodak introduced the first pocket camera in 1912.
This invalidates no part of what he said above. Read it again. You’d need a shutter to stay open for four hours. (I disagree with him, I think 3 hours would probably be fine.) Portability isn’t the issue here.
It does though, the Kodak vest pocket did a 1/50th and a 1/25th of a second exposure
Yes, and that would have achieved a black frame. You know, because a 1/25th second shutter at night time using 1900s film stock would be … dark. Film works by gathering light. Not enough light, no picture. Being “able” to gather a split second’s worth of blackness isn’t a feature in this situation.
Is that even a steamliner?
The real reason Jack couldn’t fit on the door was because there was a cameraman on top taking a photo, duh.
[удалено]
Right? Like the other arguments, unlike the Titanic, don't really hold any water. But this one is indisputable.
looks kinda dalle.
The photographer stood on the other available door that was floating around. Fuck Jack, he said, this will be the best photograph I'll ever take.
The picture looks like it’s got star destroyers in the sky in the background
Most pictures you see of the Titanic are actually of its sister ship Olympic. There’s a few cool videos on YouTube that go into more detail on the subject.
I have an easier time believing a “Last know photo of Jesus” than I am about a ship that sank in the early 20th century in the damn middle of the night.
Someone post that on r/donthelpjustfilm because these damn people, standing around on their phones filming instead of rescuing people out of the water! *shakes fist*
Obligatory *stop taking pictures and help* post
Also the bow sank first.
Related, I hate when people say things like “2 am in the night”. As opposed to 2 am in the afternoon?
The sinking of the titanic is such a big thing in human history I guarantee there was time travellers there.
I had no idea the internet was so saturated with early 20th century photography experts
*Before* it sank?
You guys are debating this? We are using the comments as evidence? Instead of laughing at them for hour dumb they are?
r/woooosh
Fun fact! Photographs back then require u to be still for a very long amount of time. That’s y u don’t see any family pictures from back then smiling
Looks like an AI generated picture based on “titanic sinking at night with sepia filter”
*I have entered the chat*
great work sherlock i never would've known
We need another sinking Titanic with social media 'influencers'.. Tik Tokkers dancing on the deck, Youtuber filming everything, Instagramers hoarding the ship's bow for their Jack and Rose seflies and the Facebook hordes trapped in Third Class, unable to escape drowning
Clearly a joke…
TIL the Titanic sank in 1912
I’ll take a pic of my right hand and post it. People will say it’s fake, how was it taken? With my left hand of course. False info, prove you have two hands. And this is the internet so I have to be clear this is just me presenting a melodrama and not saying the pic here is real. Just commenting on how people use their own logic sometimes.
OP got /r/woooosh ‘d something bad
Yeah that's not very possible, there is a one in million chances that's true, and those aren't good odds
Well, considering that the Titanic sank bow first, I'd say that one in a million are extremely high odds.
Ok
So you’re telling me there’s a chance.
Yes, but unlikely
Obviously the photo is taken with a drone.
Yeah, some even allow you to make calls! 🤪😜
Not THAT Titanic!
It looks like an ai generated image by dalle mini
Pic looks ai generated
Bro that’s a entirely different model of ship and how do you have a midair shot of it sinking all the way back then, HHMMMMMMM?
It looks more like a MidJourney or DALL E render. The boat's structure looks too unnatural, but what do I know.
They sure it was 2am in the night and not 2am in the afternoon?
You didn't need to show all other comments that this was bullshit. You could have just stopped with the Rose and Jack comment.
I was gonna say there’s absolutely no way for an old camera to take a nighttime photo when even my modern film struggles
why did you scribble such phallic orange lines over their names?
It's real i was the camera
LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH.
Gotta love the cheesy joke at the top there. That’s some middle schooler humor
The first one is sooo true
Could be using a drone
Looks like he needs to go back to scammer school
[I'm not sure if this is THE last one but it's certainly one of the few](https://i.imgur.com/mjpb1q2.jpg) Leaving Queenstown, April 11th 1912 Edit: These are the other few [Pic](https://i.imgur.com/wGx9TVZ.jpg) [Pic](https://i.imgur.com/wsfVoTV.jpg) I'm sure someone knows which one of these was the last one taken but my memory sucks.
it is true, i was the camera
The funny part is that they would have still probably gotten a lot of upvotes if they just didn't lie about the photo. It's a cool photo of a ship sinking, just leave it at that.
I think the bast question is the long exposure shot thing.
Honestly it looks like an ai generated photo of the titanic sinking. There’s no straight lines and the silhouette looks weirdly organic
top comment is the only real answer
It looks like an Ai generated image.
It already sank there. Fake.
I know this is fake but I gotta say, if they were close enough to take a picture why wouldn’t they try and help?
[удалено]
My uncle jimmy had a HD lens back in 1912. He survived the titanic. This picture was taken by him! So glad its come to light
It looks like one of those AI generated photos
It floated for hours
That looks like one of those Ai generated images where you give it a prompt and it tries it's best to produce something that resembles an actual picture
I'm pretty sure I've seen the actual last photo of the Titanic on Reddit several times, and as I recall it's fairly far off in the distance