waynebretl

Pictures from the official tour in October 2014, including the visitor center and history museum. No interior shots of homes allowed, I guess, or I would surely have some.

Here are a few of my snapshots from September 2012:

A duplicate exhibit also was at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago for many years.

Doesn't give me any further ideas, I'm afraid. I posted it to another forum where some darkroom dabblers might see it and have an idea.

Bill, is this negative part of a roll, or is it sheet film? What size? Was there a processing envelope? The subject and composition say it's a family photo, not commercial. I wonder if it could have been home developed in trays and the streak occured because part of the negative had an air bubble underneath when it went in the stop bath, so kept developing. EDIT: or maybe developer was dripped on it before it went into the developer tray or tank.

That "contrail" sure is puzzling. Very sharp edged, like it hasn't been diffused by the wind, but broad nevertheless.

My, that's gorgeous!

It seems unlikely to me that these cards were printed on the spot (not even the unique per date text only), but rather taken from pre-printed stock. I wonder if anyone here has one and can tell by the quality of the date specific info if it appears to be preprinted or not?

These are only one page of two or three.

It is the Unisphere, in white. See the 3rd and 6th photos on this page: http://nywf64.com/lighting07.html

I think those are ticket booths below, placing them on the bridge, not the Monorail.

Ask anyone who collects old TVs. Not only did the picture tube high voltage collect smoke, the whole chassis would eventually get covered in brown sticky tobacco residue, as the heat would circulate air through. It forces you to realize that everyone's lungs in a smoker's house were actively collecting it.

Pratt & Lambert, and REO Pratt Lambert ad June 65.pdf REO truck ad Feb 65.pdf

Direct Advertising magazine, Volume XLIX Number 4, 2nd Quarter 1964. This is a unique publication put out by the Paper Makers Advertising Association, which obviously had an interest in what is lovingly known around here as "landfill" and in other aspects of our lives as junk mail. The uniqueness comes from the fact that the cover and most of the ads for paper companies are printed on the brand/type of paper being advertised. Many of the ads are double sized in both dimensions and folded in quarters before being bound into the magazine. (None of these extra-size ads contained world's fair material, so I did not scan them.) Besides the editorial articles on paper and printing for the fair, there was a multipage fold out ad featuring the NYWF and previous fairs; and a two page ad featuring the NYWF orange color. I have included both of those. In scanning, I turned off the automatic color correction, so you can get a better idea of the color of the paper as it is today. I'd also note that the orange color in the ad is much more saturated to the eye than the internet file conveys, and to my eye, at least, is more saturated than the official NYWF orange. Direct Advertising.pdf

I don't know if I've seen a picture with the clock head rotated that way. Bill, could you give us a zoom to read the text?

You said slide, then negative (?).

Interesting. I'm guessing the variation in lighting color across the facade was not deliberate (it seems to have no symmetry), but due to uncontrolled variation in the high intensity discharge lamps and its emphasis by the response of the film.

very nice!

Same photog as the Morrocco pix, I presume - looking at the shadows in both, it seems s/he was going around with a two-flood-light kit.

Excellent! Thanks!

I have a copy of an ebay posting by "SOXPHOTOS" from 2015 of a photo I did not buy, obviously from the same series, and taken a few seconds before or after, with the same performers and guests. The balancing guy is standing up straight and walking with arms waving. I went back to find it and noticed it had been scanned in reverse, as evidenced by table #54. Bill, do you have that one also? More comments: It is now obvious to me that special lighting was used for the photos beyond what was in the restaurant. I also note what appears to be a striped awning over the area behind the curtains. apparently the front part of the pavilion was an open-air courtyard for bazaar shops?

This answers my question about the lighting in the Pilgrim glass shop shot. The Uni shot could be part of a sitcom plot "Hey guys, No! Don't turn 'em on! This camera cost $200!"

I visited in June-July '65, and I think I remember green trees; but I definitely recall brown grass, so I woud guess this was very early in '65 with the trees still budding.

From a professional source? Lighting looks carefully set.

How do you avoid the feeling of being picked out as the entree at the sharks' restaurant?