Rare photo of NY Times newsroom on April 15th


Jeff Marion

Member
Mar 30, 2007
10
0
71
Actually, I'm not sure how rare this photo is, but I haven't seen it in many other collections. It shows the NY Times newsroom on the morning of April 15th. According to the clock visible in the background the time is approx 10:30am.

Photo is copyright New York Times.

the_new_york_times_newsroom_1912_copy1.jpg
 

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Dec 29, 2000
6,242
241
333
Jeff, is this photo STILL under copyright? If so, it will have to be removed unless you have the Times' permission to use it here.

Please advise.
 

Jeff Marion

Member
Mar 30, 2007
10
0
71
I will ask my contact at NYT, i tried removing the image in the mean time but these boards don't let you edit your own posts after 60 minutes.
 
K

Kyle Johnstone

Guest
I could be wrong, but the calendar doesn't look as if the day says "Monday"
Upon zooming in, before it gets too blurry, it looks as though it probably says "Thursday" (1915) or maybe "Tuesday" (1913)
 

Jeff Marion

Member
Mar 30, 2007
10
0
71
looks like monday to me, but i think it's too blurry to say for sure.

according to the NYT head researcher/collection person it is 1912.

i'd be curious for others opinions.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,643
462
453
Easley South Carolina
I see a 15 April on that wall calander but no year. The day itself is too long to be "Monday" in my opinion. The clothing, equipment and furnishings are contemporary to the period but that covers a range of several years.
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,114
17
298
Yes, Eric. The "15" looks painted on. Neither figure aligns with the angle of the rest of the type on the calendar, and they don't really align with one another either. There is also something odd about the proportions.....
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,114
17
298
The base of the "1" is 'parallel' to the frame of the photograph. It should slant downward, slightly, from upper right to lower left. The "5" is a bit more convincing, but seems crowded by the "1". I'd say that at least the "1" was painted in later.
 

Eric Longo

Member
Aug 13, 2004
888
0
111
Hi Jim,

I noticed the very same things ;)
Likely an add on of some sort with that high contrast white around the information in question.

Best,
Eric
 

Jeff Marion

Member
Mar 30, 2007
10
0
71
From the NYT for what it's worth...

"The New York Times did not alter this photograph digitally in any way. Basic cleanup, to remove dust and scratches is all that was done. It is possible that years ago the original print was enhanced using black or white Ink, a practice that was common in the first half of the last century. However there was no indication of that on the back of the print. The limited information from the back of the print was embedded in the file sent to you."
 

Jeff Marion

Member
Mar 30, 2007
10
0
71
just opened the image in notepad and the embedded text simply reads.. "The New York Times newsroom at the time of the sinking of the Titanic, April 1912. (The New York Times Photo Archives)"
 

Similar threads