Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2019 March 30

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 30

Any suggestions of a new name.

Not what we're here for. Matt Deres (talk) 01:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello there. I am writing to you because I want to rename my account, as my six months waiting period has passed. Has anyone any ideas of a new name. I want it to be something about piano, vinyl records, and music hall. And I would like one that I can get taken serious with. If someone has an idea, that would be great! Thank you. The Duke 16:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC) If you want something obscure, yet vaguely pertinent, how about "The Speaking Length"? —2606:A000:1126:28D:84A8:1E5E:5535:59A2 (talk) 18:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC) @The Duke of Nonsense: Your account has already had three renames, and you have stated during your third rename that it would be your final username, so you are not eligible for any further renames. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 18:36, 30 March 2019 (UTC) @PlyrStar93: I was told in July by User:1997kB after I try to request for a change but got denied, that I would be "welcome to come back in 6 months" (6 months is in January) Thus I should be allowed another change. I promise this will be my last name, I know that sounds hard to believe, but it genuinely will. As I am going to be very careful changing my name this time. Thank you. The Duke 19:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC) [Edit Conflict] Those three parameters suggest to me: Mrs Mills. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 18:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC) I'd go for something like user:The suggested name.--TMCk (talk) 20:30, 30 March 2019 (UTC) What's with all the name changes? Maybe a good one would be "Can't make up my mind". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:08, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Pre-digital photography effect

How a picture like this be taken, using 1912 technology? Is it merely a matter of placing the subject in a room with a white floor, white walls, and lights all around to reduce shadows? I've seen lots of recent no-background images, like the photo at left, but I assume that Photoshop is used to remove a background. Nyttend (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

The trombone ? I think it was obtained using posterization. It also requires a lens at short focus in order to have the background conveniently blurred. --Askedonty (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

They didn't have photoshop, but they did have airbrushing. See also: Dodging and burning & Vignetting —2606:A000:1126:28D:84A8:1E5E:5535:59A2 (talk) 19:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not so much interested in the trombone as in the almost complete absence of a background. Could one airbrush a negative, or would all copies of this photo be airbrushed individually? Nyttend (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't know - they had entires movies colored by hand thus positive or negative ? But in the advertizing industries it was until quite recently ( the 80's) frequent to have photographies reproduced by hand using screentone techniques. The reproductions were more flashy and clean than what the photographic processes produced. --Askedonty (talk) 20:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Did they not simply use a white backdrop? In some modelling I've seen, the cloth runs from the ceiling to across the floor, removing the hard edge where shadows would tend to show. Matt Deres (talk) 21:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes they did. A common technique, especially for smaller subjects like the toy shown, was/is to arrange an area of white (or colored) paper (or acrylic) flat underneath it and gently curving to vertical behind it. Rolls of paper and plastic, commonly 4ft/1.3m wide, were marketed for this purpose. The combination of the curving surface, overexposure and out-of-focussedness compared to the correct exposure and focus for the darker subject, plus diffused and/or multi-reflected lighting, virtually eliminates visible shadows and distracting background detail. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 09:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Nyttend, the IP user above is correct. My wife and I use this effect every week when we take adoption photos of available cats/dogs at our local animal shelter. Cats especially. We use a ~5' wide roll of paper that is partially unrolled and draped over a table and rises up behind the animal. Photographers sometimes call the paper or cloth backdrop a "sweep". †dismas†|^(talk) 11:15, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Incidentally, this is an area where we probably need an article. The closest thing we seem to have is Painted photography backdrops. There oughtta be something at backdrop (photography) or similar. Matt Deres (talk) 15:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

One backdrop currently in use in photo studios is called "Seamless Background Paper".--Thomprod (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Here is a modern one, they probably used white cotton rather than vinyl. Alansplodge (talk) 10:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)