Yes, I was noticing the smokiness too. My safety sense was screaming about ventilation instead of asphyxiation.
You realize it is a hot bulb engine instead of a diesel engine. While a diesel ignites the fuel with compression heat the hot bulb starts burning the oil inside the hot bulb. Since hot bulbs do not need compression to fire they can run with less than 5:1 compression ratios. Hot bulb engines can burn almost any kind of oil as long as it is thin enough to get into the bulb on the intake stroke of the engine unlike diesels which have to be able to pump the oil into the compressed cylinder as a fine spray.
However my brain thinks of diesels as 4 stroke for some reason, although I know there are 2 strokes from way back...and that they are called Diesels because the burn Diesel. Wiki or other searches didn't say much about the kind of fuel this engine burned, so it guess and by-golly for me. Could have been Kerosene just as well back then but much more expensive and more of a premium in Poland I would think at that time.
Looks like some crane attachments are drawn on the image, like photoshopping from 100 years ago.Type F Brown Hoisting Machinery Co. locomotive crane with 40 ft. boom, 1918.
Fullsize image: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/h...e_fullsize.jpg
Never try to tell me it can't be done
When I have to paint I use http://kbs.justoldtrucks.com/
Maybe they were drawn over the real things because they were unable to capture the detail, those parts were washed out/overexposed. It was common enough then to spawn a joke that goes something like:
Customer takes an old family photo to a photo store and asked them to remove grandpa's hat from the photo. The clerk asks "What color was his hair?". The customer replied with "Won't you find that out when you remove his hat?"
I think these were probably done later and likely with modern techniques. It is possible they were done back then but this type of enhancement didn't take place very much until a decade later when inks were developed to work with either the prints or negatives, then reprinted/developed.
Close inspection of the crane I would say that the crane itself (selected) was enhanced with at least with contrast, brightness and perhaps exposure to highlight the crane over the rest of the picture (background washed out). Huge amount of lint/scratches close up that were resolved in the crane itself. The boom, although still grainy definitely has contrast adjustment and some clean up. The cabin was more so enhanced using a clone stamp or some minimal opacity brush work and the arc of that light/shadow does not fit the lighting profile...scratches are maybe 20% of the background.
As for the block/hook, note that the back of the neck of the hook has and over-spray/brush mark of lesser opacity. The block could have easily been added and the use of a clone stamp or Bandaid tool used to make it look old with the smear. The bumpers and turnbuckles and the top hat on the cabin were similarly produced with small brush work and on the rear bumper there is (obvious to me) cleanup/clone stamp work around it and inside the step bar. The top hat is much more subtle, again lighter lint/scratch and the use of opacity and spray-brush to create the reflective effect.
I probably deleted the first one subconsciously to minimize my usual spewing syllogistical thesis so I will stop here.
Thanks Jon for another rabbit hole of wonder.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)