If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Business Insider)   The Civil War looks much more civil in color   (businessinsider.com) divider line 88
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

15644 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 4:30 AM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-05 12:07:23 AM
DAMN YOUR EYES TED TURNER!!!
 
2013-10-05 12:18:17 AM
Its amazing what computers can do.

However this isn't something new. They have been colorizing black and white movies for some time now.
 
2013-10-05 12:20:08 AM
Very impressive.
 
2013-10-05 12:27:59 AM
i39.tinypic.com

You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it... Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth-right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.
 
2013-10-05 12:45:55 AM
WOW, those are beautiful.

Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then.    Bet those would have been something to see.
 
2013-10-05 12:50:08 AM

raerae1980: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.


If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.
 
2013-10-05 01:14:03 AM
This just in: blood is still red
 
2013-10-05 01:15:21 AM

NewportBarGuy: raerae1980: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.

If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.


Unlikely. The horrific nature of war has never seemed to be a very strong deterrent to its persistence.
 
2013-10-05 01:17:15 AM
You people of the South don't know what you are doing. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah yakkity yakkity ipsum lorem blah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blah.


If I wanted a history lesson I would watch The Food Network.
 
2013-10-05 01:18:35 AM
 Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.
If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.



No, not really. Because everything had to stand still, the camera equipment was bulky and required the photographer to stand directly behind it and stare into a small hole rather than watch his ass for oncoming bullets. A lot of dead cameramen.
 
2013-10-05 01:29:07 AM

DamnYankees: Unlikely. The horrific nature of war has never seemed to be a very strong deterrent to its persistence.


Well, let me leave you with this... Americans seeing the horror of war for the first time in Vietnam caused a great disturbance at home. That public reflection was very much acknowledged in strategy for the Persian Gulf War. They wanted no blood on the teevee. In Iraq II, they embedded the journos and tried to make them understand and build a relationship with the fighting man.

Ever since the age where the people can see it at home, and where you see government control the media... They know that people do not want to see the carnage.

Remember that Apache footage from wikileaks, where they just blew people away? Did you see that on the NBC Evening News before it leaked? No. Why not? Because the people would demand an end to it.

Don't let movies and TV fool you. The true carnage of war on television can turn even the "Get a Brain Morans" crowd into pacifists in short order.

If the people were ever shown the true horror or war, they would not be so easy to go along with it.
 
2013-10-05 01:30:24 AM

NewportBarGuy: Well, let me leave you with this... Americans seeing the horror of war for the first time in Vietnam caused a great disturbance at home.


And it did nothing. The Vietnam war lasted 11 years. We've followed that up with an era of pretty much endless warfare every since.
 
2013-10-05 01:32:51 AM

DamnYankees: NewportBarGuy: Well, let me leave you with this... Americans seeing the horror of war for the first time in Vietnam caused a great disturbance at home.

And it did nothing. The Vietnam war lasted 11 years. We've followed that up with an era of pretty much endless warfare every since.


Well, duh...

/televised war not only makes money for the military-industrial complex, it drives up ratings for the entertainment news industry
//WIN WIN
 
2013-10-05 02:50:47 AM

Fiction Fan: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.
If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.

No, not really. Because everything had to stand still, the camera equipment was bulky and required the photographer to stand directly behind it and stare into a small hole rather than watch his ass for oncoming bullets. A lot of dead cameramen.


And a bunch of really blurry photos.
 
2013-10-05 03:18:04 AM

fusillade762: Fiction Fan: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.
If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.

No, not really. Because everything had to stand still, the camera equipment was bulky and required the photographer to stand directly behind it and stare into a small hole rather than watch his ass for oncoming bullets. A lot of dead cameramen.

And a bunch of really blurry photos.


I always liked to think of it as America not having come into focus yet
 
2013-10-05 04:33:41 AM
The Civil War: when brother fought against brother, and hipster fought against hipster.
 
2013-10-05 04:40:09 AM
What's the big deal? I've seen "Gone With The Wind" in its entirety, and every dadgummed frame was in color, from the hoopskirts to the Atlanta flames ...
 
2013-10-05 04:41:03 AM
I believe the proper, Department of Education approved term is "photography of color."  The use of "color photography" is a derogatory relic of a time now happily in the past.

Now go sign up for your mandatory Obamacare citizen, or be taxed by your all knowing, all caring, mighty federal government.

(Lincoln trounced habeas corpus and invented his own rules as he went, but at least his followers understood that once war had concluded they needed to amend the constitution to create new federal authority-- they couldn't just invent it like bushobama have with the "state secrets" privilege and other such legal slight of hand)
 
2013-10-05 04:43:26 AM

DamnYankees: NewportBarGuy: Well, let me leave you with this... Americans seeing the horror of war for the first time in Vietnam caused a great disturbance at home.

And it did nothing. The Vietnam war lasted 11 years. We've followed that up with an era of pretty much endless warfare every since.


The kicker to all of that is that during the Vietnam war, the Chinese intelligence service (MSS) was actually running a propaganda campaign where they were recruiting agents in Europe and the US to stage student protests against the war, based on their prediction that the US would never continue a war that it's people overwhelmingly objected to. Joke was on them for thinking that, because the government ignored the protests, but the US government got in trouble much later because of the counterintelligence operation it was running to try to catch all the agents China was sending out to start the protests. Nicholas Eftimiades wrote a great accounting of the Chinese planning side of that bizarre spy battle.
 
2013-10-05 04:48:35 AM
The civil war had nothing to do with color.
 
2013-10-05 04:54:58 AM
static5.businessinsider.com
i say, good link, sir. please let the air out of my jacket before you go. that's a good lad.
 
2013-10-05 04:59:42 AM
There's a fine joke somewhere in that headline.

/another mint julep, Propecia
 
2013-10-05 05:10:45 AM
I would love to see uncle bob re,intered as a colorized hero, but in fact he was a raponious bastard.
 
2013-10-05 05:11:35 AM

robohobo: There's a fine joke somewhere in that headline.

/another mint julep, Propecia


I thought about making some play on Ted Turner.....but then that struck me so I went with it.....
 
2013-10-05 05:21:11 AM

phrawgh: The civil war had nothing to do with color.


STATES RIGHTS!
 
2013-10-05 05:37:44 AM
FTFA "Civil War was the first war to be captured on film."

I thought that was Crimea?
 
2013-10-05 05:48:22 AM
www.reoiv.com
 
2013-10-05 05:51:06 AM

DamnYankees: NewportBarGuy: raerae1980: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.

If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.

Unlikely. The horrific nature of war has never seemed to be a very strong deterrent to its persistence.


Incorrect.  Film of battles and their aftermath during the Viet Nam war is what turned the nation against the war.  Of course, steps were taken to prevent this from happening in the future.
 
2013-10-05 05:53:58 AM
How about some pictures of Colonel Angus? My wife loves Colonel Angus.
 
2013-10-05 05:54:30 AM

DamnYankees: NewportBarGuy: Well, let me leave you with this... Americans seeing the horror of war for the first time in Vietnam caused a great disturbance at home.

And it did nothing. The Vietnam war lasted 11 years.

You are wrong.  It completely changed popular opinion.  Did the government jump on board immediately?  No, of course not; when does it ever.
 
2013-10-05 05:55:03 AM
George McClellan still requesting reinforcements
 
2013-10-05 05:55:51 AM

Jammybee: FTFA "Civil War was the first war to be captured on film."

I thought that was Crimea?



Nothing ever happens unless there's an American present.
 
2013-10-05 06:08:38 AM

NewportBarGuy: raerae1980: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.

If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.


Ay-yup. And if they were to make a fast-firing gun that could fire upwards of a hundred shots a minute just by turning a crank, war would be too terrible to contemplate.
 
2013-10-05 07:02:11 AM

Cranky McOldfart: Incorrect.  Film of battles and their aftermath during the Viet Nam war is what turned the nation against the war.  Of course, steps were taken to prevent this from happening in the future.


The war was already unpopular, because it was a rebellion of an oppressed people against their cruel imperialist masters, and not only were we siding with the second group, we were siding with the second group after France (the cruel imperialist masters in question) told us that they thought it was wrong too, and they were withdrawing.

There's a reason we sent "advisors" into Vietnam and not "troops", it was widely regarded as a clusterfark from day one, both in itself and because it was catching the leftover misgivings from Korea (the aftermath of the Korean war involving some US generals and officials making some of the most blatantly batshiat crazy proposals anyone had ever heard, like using  nukes to turn the DMZ into a radioactive wasteland).  The "what the hell, America" reaction started long before anyone started taking pictures.

For that matter, Vietnam going pear-shaped hasn't stopped us from being involved in every other damned brush war in the world since, so clearly we weren't turned off that much.
 
2013-10-05 07:30:00 AM
img850.imageshack.us
 
2013-10-05 07:39:18 AM
Can't see the pics and allowing the root domain doesn't make them appear.

Go f*ck yourself Business Insider.
 
2013-10-05 07:51:35 AM
Flies eat good during a war. Give me 20 maggot!
 
2013-10-05 08:01:37 AM
static2.businessinsider.com

Lookl out you southern traitors! The Red Hotz Posse is gunning your way. Sure, they be chillin' but soon they be killin'. Gonna take your lives, your wimmen and your Richmond in that order!
 
2013-10-05 08:19:43 AM
I think what really struck me was just how contemporary the soldiers' visage and expressions are while in color. When commonly seen in black and white, they look all old-timey, like some form of pre-20th century humanoid.
 
2013-10-05 08:33:13 AM
Looks like Brooklyn
 
2013-10-05 08:33:39 AM

NewportBarGuy: raerae1980: Too bad photographing battles as they happened were too difficult for technology to capture back then. Bet those would have been something to see.

If they were able to do that, the war might have ended 3 and a half years earlier.


Chances are that would have let the traitors win.
 
2013-10-05 08:36:36 AM
Wow, Mumford & Sons discovered instagram.
 
2013-10-05 08:51:42 AM

Fiction Fan: You people of the South don't know what you are doing. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah yakkity yakkity ipsum lorem blah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blah.


If I wanted a history lesson I would watch The Food Network.


I know farkers have short attention spans so on behalf of that submission i apologize....NOT
 
2013-10-05 09:18:55 AM
here to help
Can't see the pics and allowing the root domain doesn't make them appear.
Go f*ck yourself Business Insider.


Disabling style sheets or pretending to be Googlebot works for businessinsider (the content is hidden via CSS by default and then scripts run to change that).

Pretending to be Google looks better;
but if you don't mind scrolling past a lot of unrelated crap, disabling style sheets will make all the hidden content appear:
You can disable style sheets in your browser somwhere or just click here
 
2013-10-05 09:22:20 AM
Really cool. I've always been interested in the Civil War. It's amazing how the echoes can still be felt, even to this day.
 
2013-10-05 09:26:59 AM

The Voice of Doom: or just click here


Thanks. I tried to deslidify it which usually works but it threw an error so the link is appreciated. Your internet voodoo is obviously more powerful than mine. ;-)
 
2013-10-05 09:30:32 AM
assets.nydailynews.com
You dumb hillbilly assholes are gonna get pasted. You go screw your toothless farking sister and hound dog, but leave the country and every other farking item on this planet that belongs to Uncle Sam, including his hemorrhoid donut, the fark alone.  You listen to me now. Before you do any more serious damage to yourself or your grandchildren's inheritance, you're gonna stop this redneck farking bullshiat, right now.
 
2013-10-05 09:35:03 AM

Fiction Fan: If I wanted a history lesson I would watch The Food Network.


You sound like a butthurt southerner.
 
2013-10-05 09:38:27 AM

JAGUART: I think what really struck me was just how contemporary the soldiers' visage and expressions are while in color. When commonly seen in black and white, they look all old-timey, like some form of pre-20th century humanoid.


Yep, in color it almost looks like a GQ photoshoot
 
2013-10-05 09:43:07 AM
Idiocy for those who cannot fathom history without crayola 'flesh.' How short are these people who need warm fuzzy faces. Sherman loses his madness when colorized. I really hope these people waste a lot of time drawing on iconic images. Just keep them out of the museums before they start coloring on the walls.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report