PTO vs. ETO photos observation
Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:26 am
Is it just me or does a lot of the photos from the Pacific war seem more grainy then those taken in Europe? Is it just me or is there a reasoning for it? 
Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:53 am
Think about the difference in conditions in which the photos were processed. The ETO generally had fixed assets back at base that stayed put for the duration of the war whereas the PTO was island to island. MTO was much the same as the PTO. Weather too (heat and humidity) played a role as well. I would also think that delivery of the raw materials would have been a longer and more difficult process to the PTO than to the ETO.
HTH! Mark
HTH! Mark
Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:58 am
Nathan, Mark..
forwarded your question to my very good friend Jack Heyn. Jack served a photographer, first in the 13th Sq. and later in the Hdq. Photo Section of the 3rd Attack Group ( Grim Reapers) . Here's his response:
"Perish the thought that I should masquerade as an expert, but I'll give you an opinion. To start with graininess starts with the film; the slower the film the finer the grain; the faster the film the grainier. That is why we always used 100 speed film for portraits and weddings, and even most commercial work. For sports you needed the faster, 400 speed film and graininess wasn't that important.
Now the film used in the ETO, MTO and the PTO was all the same. So as far as graininess in film is concerned it would make no difference. Now the conditions in which the film was processed was vastly different. The two years we spent in New Guinea, we had atrocious conditions. Recommended temps for developing film is 68degrees F. Our temps were seldom under 90 degrees F. Before we could run a roll of film thru the developer we had to run it thru an alum bath first to harden the emulsion. Other wise the emulsion would have flowed off the backing. We never gave it any thought, but it's entirely possible that alum bath could have effected the grain qualities of the film.
Bill, you will notice I have sent a copy of this to Fred Hill. He was a Photographer with the 71st Recon Gp., and spent a couple months with us at Doba Dura in '43 when they first came over, until his outfit got set up. At 88 he has a Photography business going and spends a lot of time in the dark room. You might even get an opinion from him, altho he doesn't check his Emails every day like we do.
Jack
forwarded your question to my very good friend Jack Heyn. Jack served a photographer, first in the 13th Sq. and later in the Hdq. Photo Section of the 3rd Attack Group ( Grim Reapers) . Here's his response:
"Perish the thought that I should masquerade as an expert, but I'll give you an opinion. To start with graininess starts with the film; the slower the film the finer the grain; the faster the film the grainier. That is why we always used 100 speed film for portraits and weddings, and even most commercial work. For sports you needed the faster, 400 speed film and graininess wasn't that important.
Now the film used in the ETO, MTO and the PTO was all the same. So as far as graininess in film is concerned it would make no difference. Now the conditions in which the film was processed was vastly different. The two years we spent in New Guinea, we had atrocious conditions. Recommended temps for developing film is 68degrees F. Our temps were seldom under 90 degrees F. Before we could run a roll of film thru the developer we had to run it thru an alum bath first to harden the emulsion. Other wise the emulsion would have flowed off the backing. We never gave it any thought, but it's entirely possible that alum bath could have effected the grain qualities of the film.
Bill, you will notice I have sent a copy of this to Fred Hill. He was a Photographer with the 71st Recon Gp., and spent a couple months with us at Doba Dura in '43 when they first came over, until his outfit got set up. At 88 he has a Photography business going and spends a lot of time in the dark room. You might even get an opinion from him, altho he doesn't check his Emails every day like we do.
Jack