Task Force...

[MakeeLearn]

Ulithi atoll in the Caroline islands. c.1945.

[Major Shane]

Nice picture. Any clue which week the Life magazine published it? Just wondering if this was a pre or post surrender photo.

Also, don't know why, but colorful umbrellas surprised me.

Thanks for sharing.

[MakeeLearn]

Welcome. There is a large number of lesser known b/w and color pics of ww2, yet the history tv shows always use the same footage.


I haven't found which issue it was in. I have found this info:

"From October 1944 to May 1945 Ulithi Atoll would serve as the central port and staging area of the United States Navy (USN) in the closing battles of the Pacific"

[MakeeLearn]

Also, don't know why, but colorful umbrellas surprised me.

Somewhere in Hawaii a hotel is missing theirs.

[Major Shane]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Welcome. There is a large number of lesser known b/w and color pics of ww2, yet the history tv shows always use the same footage.


I haven't found which issue it was in. I have found this info:

"From October 1944 to May 1945 Ulithi Atoll would serve as the central port and staging area of the United States Navy (USN) in the closing battles of the Pacific"

Do you think that is one of the repair dock ships (rectangular ship closest to shore)? It looks like the ARD in the game.

I will check the site out. Thanks again.

[MakeeLearn]

First reaction was CARRIER!!!![:)]


Looks close to a ARD

[Alpha77]

Strange pics tbh, it seems the 2nd one is later coulored ? But only in part ? And the 1st one from the beach looks a bit fake to me As if the ships in background were added in Even in 30ties they could fake photos look up communists ones eg, when they stamped out guys they did not want to have on a pic anymore - or added lots of cheering people when Lenin spoke....[:D]

Edit, 1st pic again also why are 2 guys totally dark in the pic ? Normally the sun shines at all of them right?
(I saw some fake pics starting a few years ago and now get sense something may be amiss, but I also can mostly guess so I might be wrong. We could put the pics in forensics to see what comes up [;)]) Perhaps I try later...

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Strange pics tbh, it seems the 2nd one is later coulored ? But only in part ? And the 1st one from the beach looks a bit fake to me As if the ships in background were added in Even in 30ties they could fake photos look up communists ones eg, when they stamped out guys they did not want to have on a pic anymore - or added lots of cheering people when Lenin spoke....[:D]

Edit, 1st pic again also why are 2 guys totally dark in the pic ? Normally the sun shines at all of them right?

If the article on the first could be found.


Under trees or a umbrella.

[Alpha77]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn
Under trees or a umbrella.

Yes probably, I am not good at shadow analyzing. I more rely on perspectives and photoshop lines around objects/persons. But PS was not around back then.

Please note my forensics site is not good at older pics but better for photoshopped ones. However it suspects the 1st pic is manipulated. Found some: Global double JPEG, copy rotation move and a bit blur. Just for info.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn
Under trees or a umbrella.

Yes probably, I am not good at shadow analyzing. I more rely on perspectives and photoshop lines around objects/persons. But PS was not around back then.

Please note my forensics site is not good at older pics but better for photoshopped ones. However it suspects the 1st pic is manipulated. Found some: Global double JPEG, copy rotation move and a bit blur. Just for info.

It would not be unusual for a photo journal like LIFE to condense and consolidate two pics to get across the idea without using more print space. Colour photo reproduction in a magazine was expensive back then. There is no conspiracy here.

[Rafid]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Edit, 1st pic again also why are 2 guys totally dark in the pic ? Normally the sun shines at all of them right?
(I saw some fake pics starting a few years ago and now get sense something may be amiss, but I also can mostly guess so I might be wrong. We could put the pics in forensics to see what comes up [;)]) Perhaps I try later...

You're not used to this anymore but the "dynamic range" (often called contrast in layman terms, meaning the difference in light intensity from total dark to total bright) was a lot lower in old film, especially color film. You are right: The same lighting would lead to a much more details on these people using late generation film (and even more using a DSLR), but this is just the age and no manipulation artifact. The same most likely caused the beach to look odd; it is at the bright edge of the recording capability of the film. The exact edge of overblown highlights is usually not the same for all color channels. Meaning that partially overblown objects are often also recorded slightly off color (this is still true in the digital age, though in camera software tries its best to correct).

Also note the chromatic aberration around the guy in the front right: The orange fringe above his shoulders and the blue fringe just below the "I" of LIFE. Chromatic aberration is an optical effect that can be caused as a lens defect or during digitalization of the photo by the scanner. If it is caused by the scanner, then it is evenly distributed in all areas of the picture. But it seems to be minimal at best around the guy and table under the umbrella in the center. If it caused by the lens it is most pronounced in the extreme corners and before the focal plane - both applies to the guy in the front right. Hence I would go for lens defect. But if a lens defect was recorded in color, then the photo was shot in color.

Whether or not the fleet was taken from a different image - I don't know. It would be simple; there are no details at all around the horizon, where the two pictures would have met.

[Itdepends]

The first picture does look odd. The carrier on the far right doesn't have the same alignment as the other ships. You would expect them to be lined up if they were swinging at anchor as you can see in the second picture.

[MakeeLearn]

I bet there was alot of light reflected off of the white sand. How the pics were developed could influence the look.

I have done some black and white histological film development and how long or short of time the pic sets in each pan can also change the look of the final picture.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

The first picture does look odd. The carrier on the far right doesn't have the same alignment as the other ships. You would expect them to be lined up if they were swinging at anchor as you can see in the second picture.

Is it rolling ?

[Alpha77]

ORIGINAL: Rafid

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Edit, 1st pic again also why are 2 guys totally dark in the pic ? Normally the sun shines at all of them right?
(I saw some fake pics starting a few years ago and now get sense something may be amiss, but I also can mostly guess so I might be wrong. We could put the pics in forensics to see what comes up [;)]) Perhaps I try later...

You're not used to this anymore but the "dynamic range" (often called contrast in layman terms, meaning the difference in light intensity from total dark to total bright) was a lot lower in old film, especially color film. You are right: The same lighting would lead to a much more details on these people using late generation film (and even more using a DSLR), but this is just the age and no manipulation artifact. The same most likely caused the beach to look odd; it is at the bright edge of the recording capability of the film. The exact edge of overblown highlights is usually not the same for all color channels. Meaning that partially overblown objects are often also recorded slightly off color (this is still true in the digital age, though in camera software tries its best to correct).

Also note the chromatic aberration around the guy in the front right: The orange fringe above his shoulders and the blue fringe just below the "I" of LIFE. Chromatic aberration is an optical effect that can be caused as a lens defect or during digitalization of the photo by the scanner. If it is caused by the scanner, then it is evenly distributed in all areas of the picture. But it seems to be minimal at best around the guy and table under the umbrella in the center. If it caused by the lens it is most pronounced in the extreme corners and before the focal plane - both applies to the guy in the front right. Hence I would go for lens defect. But if a lens defect was recorded in color, then the photo was shot in color.

Whether or not the fleet was taken from a different image - I don't know. It would be simple; there are no details at all around the horizon, where the two pictures would have met.

Thanks for this info, I already suspected my tools and eyes are more usefull for digital newer photos. Of course older film and cameras behave different. I had still an analogue 10 years ago or. Some still say analogue is better.[:)]
Are you professional in photography ?

BTW: You get much better quality pics from eg. WW1 or even ACW era, but in b/w. So there is not much excuse today for totally bad pics, except someone screws up the JPG conversion or / and uses to low res and / or pic is resaved too often.

Here an example of added in korean guys (when pic is small then hard to detect)

[MakeeLearn]

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featur ... lbase.html


"DIDN’T KNOW THIS!! Kept secret throughout the war, US naval base at Ulithi was for a time the world’s largest naval facility



On March 1945, the largest convoy of US Navy ships and personnel sailed from a base in the Pacific Ocean.

Where was this base? This monumental force comprised of 106 destroyers, 29 aircraft carriers, 15 battleships, and 23 cruisers and you can just imagine how many support personnel was required.

The US base was located on Ulithi. At the time, it was the largest and most strategic, but it was unknown; very few civilians had heard of it.




By the time the US Command released Ulithi’s name, the incredible base was deserted. The war had moved on to Japan; Ulithi was history, and the press was not about to print ancient news.

Ulithi is 1300 miles south of Japan, specifically Tokyo, 850 miles east of the Philippines, and 360 miles southwest of Guam.

It is a classic Pacific atoll with coral reef, palm trees, and white sand. It had depths ranging 80 to 100 feet; suitable depths for anchoring the huge naval ships. It was the only fitting haven for 800 miles where the US Navy could anchor its ships.

The coral reef is approximately 20 miles long and 10 miles wide, and there are over 30 little islands rising slightly above sea level, the largest only half a square mile in area.

This natural geography provided a natural harbor, as well as protection for the huge naval force."

[Rafid]

Not a professional, just an enthusiastic amateur.

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Please note my forensics site is not good at older pics but better for photoshopped ones. However it suspects the 1st pic is manipulated. Found some: Global double JPEG, copy rotation move and a bit blur. Just for info.

As for the automatically found defects:
‘Global double JPEG’ - There is no way this comes from analog manipulation. Either digital manipulation or more likely people resaving (and hence recompressing) the picture too often along its digital life.
‘copy rotation move’ - Very likely a false positive as this is another digital era tool. Would be interesting to know which areas are supposed to be copied. The algorithm was mostly likely triggered by some ships (the very similar CVs?) in the background. Guess these algorithms don't expect to get ships of the same class in the same alignment in blurry quality.
bit blur - most interesting. Is this generally about the photo (then it is age) or does it give specific areas that are lacking sharpness? If this algorithm specifically mentions the horizon line area as the affected zone, it would indeed imply that two pictures were mended together and the intersection blurred (or smeared) to hide it.

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Strange pics tbh, it seems the 2nd one is later coulored ? But only in part ? And the 1st one from the beach looks a bit fake to me As if the ships in background were added in Even in 30ties they could fake photos look up communists ones eg, when they stamped out guys they did not want to have on a pic anymore - or added lots of cheering people when Lenin spoke....[:D]

Edit, 1st pic again also why are 2 guys totally dark in the pic ? Normally the sun shines at all of them right?

If the article on the first could be found.


Under trees or a umbrella.

Actually the three guys in the shadows are: Clay Shaw, E Howard Hunt, and Frank Sturgis [8D]

The photo was taken by Jim Garrison.

I think this was the prelim shot for Delaney Plaza

LOL [:D]

I think LIFE / TIME shots from the early days of photo journalism have 'frequently been shopped / staged' as history has proven.

Even the much controversial '1st shot or 2nd shot or staged shot' controversy of raising the flag at Iwo Jima falls into this.

Either way it is not necessarily a intended as a covert deception of everyone; potentially a censorship by the USN near the time it was shot or until the time it was officially de-classified.

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn


https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featur ... lbase.html

I had seen (and knew) some of this.. I had even seen images of "Murderers Row" before on Google images; but never before in the one place with such and explanation.

Evidently there are further links including Naval Ship Modelers looking for the definitive ship list to build a diorama of the same.

Nice link on that.. a real treat to browse through.

[BBfanboy]

One of the few Kaiten torpedo attacks during the war took place at Ulithi. The Kaitens were sent in to sink carriers but the only one to make an attack hit AO-59 Mississinewa and sank her. Conjecture is that the Kaiten driver got disoriented and could make out a long hulled vessel which he took to be a CV. The failure of this attack took away a lot of the enthusiasm for the Kaiten that the IJN high command had previously.