1998 RMS Titanic Inc Titanic mosaic


Feb 14, 2011
2,447
32
123
Anyone know if Ballard sought to compile a stern section mosaic?
To date the only stern section mosaic I have seen was the 98' mosaic of bow and stern sections, done by Paul Mathias.
What do you all think of the 1998 mosaic?

regards


Tarn Stephanos
 

Mark Draper

Member
Nov 9, 2004
308
4
111
Ballard's new book mentions a stern mosaic having been done this year, but nothing yet said on it being published in a book or magazine. I also want to see this 2004 stern photomosaic. The 1998 mosaic is ok, but the stern mosaic done was crappy, there are alot of errors on the entire mosaic that the mosaic's Ballard did don't have. The 1998 mosaic blots out and blurs areas easily seen in the 1987 bow section mosaic. A good example of this is the gymnasium/grandstaircase, the 1998 image shows a big blur in that location, while the new 2004 mosiac shows alot of detail in how it really looks.
 

Mike Bull

Member
Dec 23, 2000
515
14
171
I didn't like the 98 mosaic at all; thought it made the ship look like two giant turds.

The colouring may not be even on the new Ballard one, but it's a heck of a lot better!
 

Mark Draper

Member
Nov 9, 2004
308
4
111
I agree Mike Ballard's mosaics look amazing
happy.gif
That's why I'm not happy with the book or magazine issue showing the stern section.
 

Dan Cherry

Member
Mar 3, 2000
775
9
0
I am not sure what one is expecting to see with any potential stern section mosaic - the overhead shots, save for the fantail and the spot where the aft davit for Boat No. 16 lies, reveal scarcely anything but a jumbled tangle of collapsed decking, bulkheads, etc. The third class entrance landing on D-deck still has a small collection of black and white floor tiles, but at this point, what else is there to see from overhead?
Footage revealed on television and in documentary 'specials' limit their shots of the stern probably because there's not much recognizable to *show*. The 1998 mosaic, as Mike Bill said, was coloured poorly (LOL) and was unclear at best from what I saw of it.
At least with the bow, which despite small 'discoveries' being made for the rivet-counters, has been thoroughly and redundantly explored, in my opinion, but also keep in mind most of the bow section is an entity that has much that is identifiable, in many aspects....

...not so much with the stern...

My .02
 

Mark Draper

Member
Nov 9, 2004
308
4
111
I see, but for the stern, I wished to see it because I'm curious to see a visual image of what's changed, as Ken's 2001 report said the upper decks of the remaining superstructure collapsed. Also if the mast on the bow section changed, what then of the stern section's mast?

I also say this because I'm making a wreck model of the Titanic as it looks in 2004.
 
Feb 14, 2011
2,447
32
123
..."it made the ship look like two giant turds".....


Great scott!! I didnt walk away with that impression. Your comparison is tantamount to heresy!
Well, Roy Mengot once mentioned in discussions with the Mathias team, that they didnt fully grasp what the stern looked like BEFORE the sinking, so there was a lot of guesswork...
Plus the 2nd class elevator house was much larger than it should be...
On a related note, did dr Ballard ever do a photomosaic of Lusitania?
How about Britannic?

many thanks


Tarn Stephanos
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mark Draper

Member
Nov 9, 2004
308
4
111
A mosaic of Lusitania? The only one I know of is the nameplate on the port side of the hull seen in his book.

As for Britannic, I have no idea, nothing was mentioned of one ever made of Titanic's bigger sister.
 
Jan 29, 2001
1,282
16
221
Actually if you had purchased the TITANIC wreck mosaic print from RMST Inc. you could appreciate the stern wreckage details via a magnifying glass.

BTW, I am fortuante in owning one signed by George Tulloch... compliments of Matthew Tulloch!

Michael Cundiff
USA
 
Dec 23, 2017
1,128
717
188
I was wondering if anyone has a high resolution version of this mapping anywhere? I know the scan has a very ugly color to it but it would be interesting to see it up close, i have been unable to find anything on it outside of a old ebay auction, a low resolution version from the archive.org and in the answers from the abyss doc
 
Dec 23, 2017
1,128
717
188
Did my best to restore the only two versions of the map i found, i see some interesting stuff by the gymnasium, i wish we had the high res version
1998Ebay.jpg
1998Site.jpg
 

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
1,225
169
128
15
Maryland, USA
I was wondering if anyone has a high resolution version of this mapping anywhere? I know the scan has a very ugly color to it but it would be interesting to see it up close, i have been unable to find anything on it outside of a old ebay auction, a low resolution version from the archive.org and in the answers from the abyss doc
Does anyone know if there is a portside mosaic of the stern, and where to find it? (Potential link please)
 

Ron Cole

Member
Jul 27, 2020
3
2
3
Anyone know if Ballard sought to compile a stern section mosaic?
To date the only stern section mosaic I have seen was the 98' mosaic of bow and stern sections, done by Paul Mathias.
What do you all think of the 1998 mosaic?

regards


Tarn Stephanos
I worked for Paul Matthias, and did most of the work on the photomosaic myself. At least, stitching the images together. I worked with what I had available to me, and had no reference material to determine how big each item was. Just the photos. The colorizing was done by someone else. What I had was basically b&w, with just touches of color here and there. I am talking only about the bow and stern sections, not the side views or debris field. I was using a windows computer, and thousands of photos. We tried using a team of people who would each work on a section, but I found that they were all different proportions and stitching them together was pretty nearly impossible. So I had to start over and do them all myself. Paul Matthias did all of the leg work and preliminary work before I got the pics. He went down to the wreck and did an amazing job of coordination and compilation. For anyone to call it a "turd" has no idea what was involved in trying to put together an image at such an early stage of the entire project. Especially with the computing power we had to work with. The mosaic gave people a first look at what the two sections looked like and allowed some analysis to begin. Imaging technology has come a long way since then. I daresay that, if I had the technology that is available today to work with then, it would have looked much more clear. As far as the stern, it was a jumble of twisted metal and wreckage. it was impossible to discern what exactly was there from the resolution of the photos. So I connected them in order, as they were. If the proportions were not correct, it's because of the perspective of the photos that were supplied. The dang thing is 2.5 miles down, and was photographed using tethered ROV's, going on transects up and down the wreckage with downward looking cameras and lights. Understand that no images were altered. Each photo appears there in the mosaic exactly as it came from the cameras. If something is not clear, that is how it appeared in the picture. So if someone, sitting on their couch today wants to criticize, I suggest you try doing it yourself with the same things we had to work with. I doubt you would do any better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Ron Cole

Member
Jul 27, 2020
3
2
3
Please note my responses to a couple of the posts in this thread. I created the photomosaic in question in 1998 from the photos that were taken on the expedition. I was also in the TV documentary, "Titanic; Answers from the Abyss". It's on Youtube. I'm not saying that I went down in the submersible. I did my part on dry land, after the fact. LOL. I have one of the original images of the mosaic in my living room. Not for sale, by the way.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads