Humanities desk
< February 23	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 25 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities 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.

February 24[edit]

German photographers[edit]

Can anyone help me identified the photographers of these photographs: File:Hermann A. Widemann (1).jpg and File:Hermann A. Widemann and wife.jpg (Hermann A. Widemann in both images; so I am assuming they are both German, the first is from Frankfurt and not so sure on the second one). Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first one appears to be Paul Plagwitz (compare with his photos at the Manskopf collection of the Goethe University Frankfurt). Paul Plagwitz also has two photography-related inventions registered, a non-halation plate (filed in 1900) and a Process for reducing photographic silver image layers (patented in 1928).

I believe the second one is Jean Baptiste Feilner. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

what is the difference between street photography, travel photography, photojournalism, and documentary photography?[edit]

I am not sure whether there is any difference, and if so what the difference is between these photography genres: street photography, travel photography, photojournalism, and documentary photography. what is the difference between these genres? who are the most important photographers of each genre? how can we categorise a photo as belonging to one genre (e.g. street photography) but not in the other genres (e.g. documentary photography). Σταυρούλα Ρεβή (talk) 04:24, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The last two seem rather similar, in that both use photographs to tell a particular new story. Street photography doesn't need to be newsworthy, and neither does travel photography. Travel photography does need to show exotic locations, though, while street photography can be right in your home town. StuRat (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Street photography, travel photography, photojournalism and documentary photography. Note that with most categorisation of stuff, there tends to be some overlap such that it can always be a judgement call if you only want one category for whatever reason. Even more so if one isn't actually really the same sort of thing (photojournalism). Also any "most important" list is difficult particularly when you're talking about a something as wide and subjective and as much history as important photographers of specific genres. Nil Einne (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian irredentism[edit]

Were there any feelings of Norwegian irredentism in the provinces Jemtland, Herjedalen, Idre & Serna ceded by Denmark-Norway to Sweden during the Second Treaty of Brömsebro (1645), like there were for Denmark in the Scanian provinces? And when did these provinces become more Swedish in make up and allegiance than Norwegian? Presumably they remained part of Sweden instead of returning to Norway when Sweden-Norway were in a personal union from 1814–1905. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Conquest of Jemtland (1677), part of the Scanian War. You may also find Scandinavian grudge match: a rivalry that has cooled but still continues interesting. Alansplodge (talk) 12:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Japanese cliques[edit]

Were there before and during WWII (let's say from 1920 to 1945) pro-Japanese Chinese military cliques / warlords outside of what were Japanese puppet regimes (Manchukuo, Mengjiang, Provisional Government of the Republic of China, Reformed Government of the Republic of China...)? Thanks. --93.71.191.104 (talk) 07:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming that you're looking for groups outside of what is mentioned at Collaborationist Chinese Army? --Jayron 32 12:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes (OP here). --151.41.173.25 (talk) 19:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, peopel who were not actually controlled by the Japanese tended to fall along a spectrum of pro- and anti-Japanese sentiment, as you might expect. Zhang Zuolin stands out as one of the most pro-Japanese of the pre-1928 warlords. Pre-1928 President Duan Qirui and Premier Liang Shiyi are also usually regarded as pro-Japanese. Many of the early Nationalist revolutionaries (i.e. the faction that took power after 1928) studied or stayed in Japan, including Sun Yat-sen, and so had a relatively positive attitude towards Japan. For example, the diaries of Chiang Kai-shek reveal that in his youth he was rather more anti-British (as the leading colonial power in southern China) than Japan. Between the consolidation of Manchukuo in 1932 and the outbreak of war proper in 1938, Japan undertook a project of fostering pro-Japanese warlords, which included sponsoring Tang Shaoyi and Zhang Jingyao. --165.225.80.99 (talk) 11:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is the job description for a file clerk at a law office?[edit]

I found mentioning this job title here [1]. Just wonder. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A law office is an office where lawyers work. A clerk is someone who works in the office doing administrative tasks. A file clerk would be someone who maintains the office's documents, such as retrieving documents for lawyers who need them, or returning documents into the correct location in storage when the lawyers are done with them. --Jayron 32 16:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did people perceive depth in ancient times?[edit]

In ancient and prehistoric times, did people perceive depth in an image differently than people do today? Could they recognize themselves in a reflection? 107.77.194.188 (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Mirror test can easily be passed by any anatomically modern humans, so yes to the second question. --Jayron 32 16:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first question is more interesting. The majority of the art you see from before about the 12th century is strikingly flat and without perspective. This is not what you'd call a reliable source, but there's some interesting discussion of the topic here on Reddit.

To some degree it was clearly a style thing. (In the same sense that a Snoopy cartoon doesn't have depth or realism.) But also the techniques for reliably conveying a realistic perspective had to be developed and passed down. It would be a tough skill to develop on your own if you didn't have any examples to learn from. However, many people don't realize that tradition emerged more than once. For example, See Fayum mummy portraits. Those started around the 1st century BC, and if you didn't know better you might guess they were from Europe, centuries later. ApLundell (talk) 17:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perspective (graphical) notes some ancient uses. It notes the use of perspective in Chinese art from 1st century CE and ancient Greece from 5th century BC. --Jayron 32 17:30, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Werner Herzog's documentary Cave of Forgotten Dreams showed how the painters at the Chauvet Cave used the natural formations in the rock to enhance their work. MarnetteD|Talk 20:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that drawing with perspective is inherently difficult to grasp; all that any artist has to learn (which can be done by trial and error) is to draw what the eyes see (not what the brain sees). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One factor that interfered with drawing perspective is that it was often required that more important people and gods be drawn larger. Still, you'd think they would have made perspective drawings by putting the important people close to the front, and the less important people in back. StuRat (talk) 22:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A kind-of mixed answer: see our article Acts of John, an apocryphal heretical-Christian writing apparently composed between 150 and 200. In one episode, St John has his portrait painted, and understanding that it's him, he marvels at it because he's never seen what he looks like before; clearly the author imagined a realistic painting, not some stylized thing whose viewers would have understood that it didn't significantly approach reality. Of course, the real St John obviously saw paintings of other people (an idea not rejected by this fabrication), so he would have been familiar with portraits in general. Nyttend (talk) 12:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And finally, on your second question, see Mirror#History and associated images, including the one I've included here; we have ancient depictions of people really using mirrors to see what they looked like. Nyttend (talk) 12:34, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that perspective is not a real phenomenon. Objects don´t shrink as a function of the squared distance, nor do railway tracks meet at a focal point on the horizon. Perspective is the result of the specific optics of lens-bearing devices. You may call it an optical illusion. A hypothetical humanoid species possessing flat compound eyes (as used by insects but without curvature) would perceive no perspective at all as only parallel “rays of light” would be recorded. The field of vision of such an eye would, however, be 0°. We have an article for flat 0° vision lacking any perspective. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:11, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The idea that pre-historic hunter-gatherers perceived depth differently features in the so-called carpentered world hypothesis. There's also the idea ancients in historic times saw colors differently (because the Greeks used words like "bronze" to describe the sky etc), and some even say people weren't really conscious as recently as 3000 years ago. Asmrulz (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]