SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Found City Photos (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   noirish Los Angeles (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=170279)

PHX31 Aug 6, 2013 3:44 PM

Another helpful way to keep the thread clean would be to not quote posts - if you do, especially if it is a longer post, only keep the small pertinent portions of the post and delete the rest. It's hard to follow the flow when huge posts with several pictures keep repeating due to being quoted. I think it just makes people skip over potentially interesting subject matter. But this is still the best thread out there, keep up the good work!

jg6544 Aug 6, 2013 5:40 PM

Another thing I'd suggest is not reposting pictures someone else has posted already.

westcork Aug 6, 2013 5:49 PM

I like long posts, especially ones that took somebody a considerable amount of time to research and prepare.

westcork Aug 6, 2013 5:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jg6544 (Post 6222928)
Another thing I'd suggest is not reposting pictures someone else has posted already.

Google has an image search feature; where you can paste a URL of an image, and it will show you anywhere that same image (not URL) has been posted before. It is very helpful to validate you are posting something original...

Those Who Squirm! Aug 6, 2013 6:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H.L.P (Post 6213001)
Hello everyone,
I haven't really posted anything on this thread before,
but I've been following it for a long time.
One of my favorite things to do, is to look through this great thread
while listing to my jazz records. Such as my
1950 Harry James Dance Parade record.

http://imageshack.com/a/img542/5977/91k1.jpg
Photo by me.
http://imageshack.com/a/img855/6176/h6wk.jpg
Photo by me.

When I listen to a record like this and look at the thread,
it goes so well together, it adds another layer of history
to the pictures.
Then today I was in the local record shop
and came across this record with some familiar looking street cars,
and I immediately thought of this thread...

Harold Betters Funk City Express (1966)
http://imageshack.com/a/img401/2161/7di1.jpg
Photo by me.

Im pretty sure those are old Los Angeles Street cars. I thought this might be cool to post on here. Sorry about the low quality pics but i've been wanting to post something on here for a while now,plus Im lacking in the camera department,
-Steven

They are indeed old L.A. streetcars. Your picture is just a small piece of a well-known larger photo of numerous cars stacked up on Terminal Island, waiting to be scrapped.

I used to listen to Jelly Roll Morton music while reading a history of Santa Monica! That may sound like an incongruous combination, but JRM did spend quite a few years in L.A. His "Kansas City Stomp" was titled not after the city in Missouri but after the Kansas City Saloon in Tijuana. Old music and pictures can indeed be an immersive experience!

GaylordWilshire Aug 6, 2013 8:29 PM

:previous:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-y...tackcompos.jpg


There were stacks and stacks of both Yellow and Red cars on Terminal Island.




Also--here's a perfect example of a way to reduce repetition and length, as PHX31 suggested. Only the third picture in H.L.P.'s post was being commented on below--the top two could have been eliminated in the quote.


Quote:

Originally Posted by PHX31 (Post 6222803)
Another helpful way to keep the thread clean would be to not quote posts - if you do, especially if it is a longer post, only keep the small pertinent portions of the post and delete the rest. It's hard to follow the flow when huge posts with several pictures keep repeating due to being quoted. I think it just makes people skip over potentially interesting subject matter. But this is still the best thread out there, keep up the good work!


Various credits incl

http://www.gettyimages.com/

http://www.charlesphoenix.com/

http://realneo.us/

http://www.pacificelectric.org/

http://www.laobserved.com/

fhammon Aug 6, 2013 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by westcork (Post 6222943)
I like long posts, especially ones that took somebody a considerable amount of time to research and prepare.

I appreciate them too, very much, but when they get quoted and redisplayed 3 or 4 times by enthusiastic members, it gets really tedious and makes it more difficult to get on to the next presentation.

Again, if somebody want's to quote please leave out the photos or all but the most significant photos and relevant text.
I believe most everybody here would appreciate that.

It will be seen and read by the original poster (assuming they're regulars) and anyone else who's interested, have no fear.

fhammon Aug 6, 2013 8:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wojtko (Post 6221492)
I do this with a 3d modeling software.
Can i put my "camera" anywhere ... because the object exists in three dimensions.
some images of the work phase

http://wojtko.com/media/01.png
[

This is fantastic!
What software are you using?

I'm pretty good with Autocad and SolidWorks but I've never attempted anything like this. Good work wojtko!

GaylordWilshire Aug 6, 2013 9:13 PM

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-b...2520PM.bmp.jpgLAPL


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-n...510%2520PM.jpgLos Angeles


At first I thought Urban Outfitters--a pretty forgettable outfit--was going to strip off the the Rialto's marquee. But it seems they're going to save it. We'll see. Read about it in Los Angeles here.

westcork Aug 6, 2013 11:45 PM

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY
ALHAMBRA FIRE STATION NO. 4
(FIRE STATION NO. 74).
HABS No. CA—2292
LOCATION:
2505 West Norwood Place, Alhambra, Los Angeles County. California

SIGNIFICANCE:
Station No. 74 was one of two beautiful 1930 vintage, brick bungalow-type fire stations in Alhambra. The other fire station, Station No. 72, still exists in the City.

DESCRIPTION:
Single-story, unreinforced, triple thickness masonry, bungalow-type tire station built to accommodate five Fire Fighters, with wood framed roof structures, Spanish tile roof, apparatus room built to accommodate two 1930 vintage fire trucks, and a brick hose tower which doubled as a drill tower and rose 20—feat above the station.

HISTORY:
Designed by Richard C. Farrell, Architect, acid built by C. B. Stratton Construction Company Of Temple City, California. Construction begun April 3, 1931, and was completed October of that same year at a cost of $15,000.

Station No. 4, later renumbered to Station No. 74, (Under the Area C Number System), served continuously as a fire station housing Engine Company 74, Reserve Engine 75, and three to four fire fighters until October 1, 1987.

On that date, at 7:42 A.M., an earthquake measured at 5.9 on the Richter Scale, hit the City of Alhambra, severely damaging Station 72 and Station 74 rendering them both unsafe and uninhabitable. The hose tower was reduced to roof level shortly after the earthquake to reduce the chance of an aftershock destroying the tower and the station, until the final disposition of the station could be achieved.

After a thorough study of the cost of reconstruction and the limited usefulness of the facility after reconstruction, the City Council and the Fire Department found it would be in the City’ s best interest to build a new facility to serve as Station 74.

SOURCES:
Alhambra Fire Department History and the Alhambra Post Advocate.

HISTORIAN:
Christopher L. Arnold. Alhambra Fire Department Historian, January 24, 1990.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011589pv.jpg
LOC (Library of Congress)

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011593pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011594pv.jpg
LOC

Tourmaline Aug 7, 2013 2:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by westcork (Post 6222943)
I like long posts, especially ones that took somebody a considerable amount of time to research and prepare.


Taken seriously, these gripes stifle, rather than encourage, fresh and original posts. As someone who has followed this thread since its inception, I have noticed post sizes naturally ebb and flow with any given subject matter and the relative availability of subject matter images. More interest typically equals more posts or longer posts. I see nothing wrong with a one-picture post that requires no explanation. But I also agree with Westcork and welcome posts laden with photos and chock full of scholarly text. I may not read or understand them, but they are there should I elect to try. I can also ignore them.

On the subject of duplicate posts, despite first impressions, not all images are the same. Some are improved versions with more detail. Sometimes it takes many sets of eyes to realize this. This is one reason heftier posts may occasionally be preferable to skimpier ones. And every once in a while, there is a gem posted that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. Trepidation due to the possibility of a repost can practically guarantee many gems will remain hidden. If the image is a repost, how about a subtle reminder with a link to the earlier post? Since the USC format change, some posts that could have been reposts aren't. A few times, images I remember being posted have disappeared for no reason. This can create another potential for unwanted reposts.

Sorry to say this, but I would also prefer a bloated board to one that suffers from limited or no activity. What many may consider tedious garbage, a few may find interesting. Tedious posts may also inadvertently lead to something of interest. Harken back to an old palm (Arcade) discussion. My disinterest slowly changed to fascination as I plodded through many seemingly-repetitive posts. I appreciate others lamenting about "palm fatigue" but think it was a relatively minor inconvenience for the fascination of a few, including me. http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/show...ostcount=14655

In the end, I simply ignore what I do not like and follow what I do like.


1969
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...IKNVEJ7EH3.jpghttp://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...IKNVEJ7EH3.jpg


1978
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...NS7A66KU4K.jpghttp://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...NS7A66KU4K.jpg

jaco Aug 7, 2013 2:12 AM

In the end, I simply ignore what I do not like and follow what I do like.[/QUOTE]



Agree.

RudyJK Aug 7, 2013 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaco (Post 6223529)
In the end, I simply ignore what I do not like and follow what I do like.



Agree.[/QUOTE]

Agree as well, I guess. I only read the first part of the post. :D Too long...

I do wish the posts with the chopped up pictures all with the same subject in different sizes were more rare. And the multi-colored fonts would go away. GW at 5:13 gave the perfect post IMO. I love before and afters. Short and sweet too.

But, I should shut up. I contribute nothing and enjoy the fruits of others labors.

Cheers!

westcork Aug 7, 2013 3:31 AM

MORRIS DAM

View of Morris Dam in San Gabriel Canyon, seen on June 17, 1937. The dam was named in honor of Samuel B. Morris, Chief Engineer and General Manager of the Pasadena Water Department, and dedicated on May 26, 1934, by Herbert Hoover. It was constructed by the City of Pasadena Water Department for the storage of domestic water, to be later used by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California as a storage unit for Colorado River water. It is overseen by Los Angeles County department of Public Works. Photo dated June 17, 1937.
http://jpg3.lapl.org/pics39/00069087.jpg
LAPL

http://jpg3.lapl.org/pics30/00064719.jpg
LAPL



MORRIS RESERVOIR VARIABLE ANGLE LAUNCHER COMPLEX
HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD
HAER NO. CA-169

Location:
State Highway 39, tour miles north of Azuza and twenty miles east of Pasadena, at the Morris Dam Reservoir, in the Angeles National Forest, County of Los Angeles, California.

Significance:
Morris Dam Test Facility (MDTF) was built at the Morris Dam Reservoir for the purpose of obtaining basic hydrodynamic data for use in design and development of Naval Ordinance, particularly air—to--water projectiles. The Variable—Angle Launcher (VAL) and its predecessor, the Fixed—Angle Launcher (FAL) were a consolidated effort between the scientific and military research and development communities. The VAL was the only structure in the nation where full scale, air launched projectiles could be tested at high velocities and variable entry angles into a body of water. MDTF served as a valuable resource during WWll and the Cold War era, spanning over 50 years. This is a unique complex where the setting has been unaltered by major modern development. The design is unique and all of its material is original. The components exhibit high quality, professional workmanship typical of contemporary naval military facilities. The facility has retained its overall feeling and appearance from the Cold War Era, maintaining a strong sense of time and place.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/182192pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/182195pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/182202pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/182265pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/182272pv.jpg
LOC

fhammon Aug 7, 2013 3:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by westcork (Post 6223398)
HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY
ALHAMBRA FIRE STATION NO. 4
(FIRE STATION NO. 74).
HABS No. CA—2292
LOCATION:
2505 West Norwood Place, Alhambra, Los Angeles County. California

SIGNIFICANCE:
Station No. 74 was one of two beautiful 1930 vintage, brick bungalow-type fire stations in Alhambra. The other fire station, Station No. 72, still exists in the City.

DESCRIPTION:
Single-story, unreinforced, triple thickness masonry, bungalow-type tire station built to accommodate five Fire Fighters, with wood framed roof structures, Spanish tile roof, apparatus room built to accommodate two 1930 vintage fire trucks, and a brick hose tower which doubled as a drill tower and rose 20—feat above the station.

HISTORY:
Designed by Richard C. Farrell, Architect, acid built by C. B. Stratton Construction Company Of Temple City, California. Construction begun April 3, 1931, and was completed October of that same year at a cost of $15,000.

Station No. 4, later renumbered to Station No. 74, (Under the Area C Number System), served continuously as a fire station housing Engine Company 74, Reserve Engine 75, and three to four fire fighters until October 1, 1987.

On that date, at 7:42 A.M., an earthquake measured at 5.9 on the Richter Scale, hit the City of Alhambra, severely damaging Station 72 and Station 74 rendering them both unsafe and uninhabitable. The hose tower was reduced to roof level shortly after the earthquake to reduce the chance of an aftershock destroying the tower and the station, until the final disposition of the station could be achieved.

After a thorough study of the cost of reconstruction and the limited usefulness of the facility after reconstruction, the City Council and the Fire Department found it would be in the City’ s best interest to build a new facility to serve as Station 74.

SOURCES:
Alhambra Fire Department History and the Alhambra Post Advocate.

HISTORIAN:
Christopher L. Arnold. Alhambra Fire Department Historian, January 24, 1990.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011589pv.jpg
LOC (Library of Congress)

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011593pv.jpg
LOC

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/c...s/011594pv.jpg
LOC


Excellent post and study westcork but if I might use my repost of it here as an example of redundancy and space taken....

Tourmaline Aug 7, 2013 3:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RudyJK (Post 6223554)
Agree as well, I guess. I only read the first part of the post. :D Too long...

I do wish the posts with the chopped up pictures all with the same subject in different sizes were more rare. And the multi-colored fonts would go away. GW at 5:13 gave the perfect post IMO. I love before and afters. Short and sweet too.

But, I should shut up. I contribute nothing and enjoy the fruits of others labors.

Cheers!


Shirley . . . you jest.

Multi-colored fonts? Do you realize the name in your post is a color different than the text? All of them are. :rolleyes:

Fortunately for some of us, the images you describe as "chopped" are seen as single photos. (It is doubtful posters post images deliberately intended to make them difficult to view. The problem "probably" has more to do with monitor, video card and/or settings compatibilities.) In fairness, I notice that most times there have been smaller unchopped versions of the same photo with a link presumably posted as a courtesy for those who might have issues viewing the enlargements.

I, for one, like the details, when available. The smaller images make me want to get my eyes examined. But maybe you feel the same way about the larger images. . . .



1968 MacArthur Park. No rain or cake. Single color font.
http://www.laobserved.com/assets/rea...k-woman-68.jpghttp://www.laobserved.com/assets/rea...k-woman-68.jpg


Worthwhile article on late photographer, William Reagh, whose work is often featured in this thread. http://www.laobserved.com/archive/20...ong_walk_1.php

fhammon Aug 7, 2013 3:45 AM

As opposed to this format:

Quote:

Originally Posted by westcork (Post 6223398)
HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY
ALHAMBRA FIRE STATION NO. 4
(FIRE STATION NO. 74).
HABS No. CA—2292
LOCATION:
2505 West Norwood Place, Alhambra, Los Angeles County. California

SIGNIFICANCE:
Station No. 74 was one of two beautiful 1930 vintage, brick bungalow-type fire stations in Alhambra. The other fire station, Station No. 72, still exists in the City.

I admire and appreciate the depth of your post westcork. Thank you for that. Somehow fire-stations are a favorite to many here. Their architecture is most often a testament and the civic pride of an era. I think to many then they represented civilization, order and safety.
I wonder if people see that as much now.

Tourmaline Aug 7, 2013 4:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhammon (Post 6223590)
As opposed to this format:

Your criticism is a valid one, particularly when using a very recent post as your example. However, if you were referring to a much older post, even a regular follower might not remember it. One or two photos with a link to the original post might be helpful, albeit duplicative. (Have seen many of the so-called regulars do this.) Besides that, what happens when some or all of the images in the original post have disappeared? Link anyway? Repost the images and incur board opprobrium?

Wondering out loud.;)

____________________________


1959 Westminster Hotel - Despite a search - Not aware that it has been posted before.
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...136HGHJGFP.jpghttp://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...136HGHJGFP.jpg

JScott Aug 7, 2013 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 4776939)
This photo was captioned, "A view of downtown from the Chamber of Commerce 1930."

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/7...pchamberof.jpg
usc digital library



https://otters.net/img/lanoir/nd97_persmod.jpg
eBay


e_r: Turns out the old color-tinted slide above (corrected for perspective here) is a companion piece to a photo you posted to the thread years ago.

The building in the background in the last phases of construction that I previously incorrectly identified as the WB Theatre is actually 315 W. 9th St., which was built in 1926. So, that pretty much conclusively dates the tinted slide (and the b/w photo) to the same year.

In fact, looking at the details of the two pictures, I think they might have been taken the same day, only a few minutes apart. I tried to find the untinted version on the USC site, but no luck.

-----

Watching "Farewell, My Lovely" (1975) right now, for the first time! I've heard the widescreen release is rather rare, so this is a real treat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpIftdXefsE

belmont bob Aug 7, 2013 5:05 PM

how we post
 
I’ve read with great interest the several comments about the proper or improper ways we should be posting. There were times in my life when I was required to follow certain rules on formatting – school papers, work reports, etc. It seems to me this is not one of those places where I need to follow any formatting other than being true to giving credit to our sources, and give respect to all who come here.

I guess I look at this forum as a way each of us expresses our interest (read love) for the subjects covered here, but I find no real reason why I should tailor my posts to anyone’s preconceived ideas of what is right and what isn’t.

So my attitude is, if someone has taken their time to research, or writes or makes a contribution, then I for one am not going to question the method.

Even though I don’t contribute much, I check this site several times a day for new gems of information or opinions that satisfy my need to relive the past. If I’m not interested, that thumb wheel on my mouse will skip past very quickly.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.