Remarkable WWII photos

Fair enough, British cameramen probably did risk themselves. They did not at Monte Cassino and in other areas of Italy. The “combat footage” is faked. End of story.

I am not sure you’re correct about the Iwo Jima flag raising being “staged” by the way. From what I have read it was shot as it happened after the soldiers were orded to place the larger flag on Mount Suribachi. What is staged about that? They were not under fire or anything like that.

That photograph has become used in media studies precisely because it is staged but gives the impression that it just happened that way, apparently the original flag positioning was done by less GIs in a far lesser dramatic posed (for want of a better word) arrangement, it was shot again to help with the feel good factor back home.

And I absolutely know that British correspondents and camera men did go into battle situations, one thing I do remember from the course was how they originally shot in B&W in situations such as Dunkirk and slowly started using colour as the war proceeded.

Unfortunately talking to one set of people about their experiences doesn’t necessarily mean it gives agood picture of what happened in general
Respect to Americans for what they went through, but let us please remember that they weren’t the only ones.

You can believe what you want to. I was not saying the Amricans didn’t stage photos at times, that is pretty bloody obvious. I’m saying that six veterans of the front lines, one of whom had been actually involved in the staged photos of Cassino and has photographic eveidence to prove it, told me that the British never sent cameramen into the actual battle because it was too dangerous, whereas the Americans did go in and film actual comabt, which is true. If you watch Hell in the Pacific you’ll see two of the combat cameramen who landed on Tarawa interviewed and it shows them watching their footage all these years later and talking about it. They were most definately on the front lines.

So, what bit are you doubting?? Are you saying the British did send cameramen into the combat scenarios?

I am not sure you’re correct about the Iwo Jima flag raising being “staged” by the way. From what I have read it was shot as it happened after the soldiers were orded to place the larger flag on Mount Suribachi. What is staged about that? They were not under fire or anything like that.

So yes, it seems there were two different philosphies, the British played it safe and fooled the nation to an extent, the Americans really did risk it all to get the action shot.

I’m not sure if I’m more surprised that you actually believe that or that you have recited it as fact here. I’m sorry but that is one sided rubbish and definitely needs evidence to substantiate it!

Some of the American classic pictures are well known to have been staged, including the one with the GIs raising the flag in the sequence shown in the link.
It was a case of both genuine and staged work from war correspondants and photographers both British and American, on all fronts.
The Pacific war was a largely American effort which explains the greater American material that we now see on that front they also had the edge on the equipment and film they could use carry aswel as having a good press framework to support their work.

As touched on in another thread lately is that American work sems so much more accessable and well presented on the net.

Respect to all war correspondant that put themselves in harms way to bring us the record of what happened, on all sides.

I interviewed a number of WWI combat soldiers earlier this year who’d all served in Italy. One of them mentioned he was in the “battle” after the battle for Pathe News. He explained that when the battle of Monte Cassino was over and everyone was moving on a number of men were held back for a week to film ‘combat’ scenes for the movie cameras and official photographers. He has a load of the photos which have him in them, and some of these have appeared in books stating they are during the combat. they’re not, and it wasn’t actually filmed in the real rubble either as there were far too many bodies in the real rubble so they went down the road.

I asked these guys if all the supposed combat footage we saw was done fake like this and they said yes, the British always did that. However, they said, the Yanks didn’t. They had cameramen up on the front lines. The British had learned it was a bad idea but the Americans had continued to do it. One of them said “I remmeber seeing one Yank at Cassino filming the action, I remember him clambering up all over the place getting his film. “Another of hese old boys said, “Oh yes, I rmemeber him. He copped it.”

So yes, it seems there were two different philosphies, the British played it safe and fooled the nation to an extent, the Americans really did risk it all to get the action shot.

Stunning to think that in the ‘Combat’ shots there is a guy taking these pictures while all around are fighting a battle. Bravery indeed to capture what was happining.

That is a classic photo, No. 20, seeing General MacArthur all dressed up in his neatly pressed uniform while his driver has no sleeves, no hat, shorts on and a much more casual attitude entirely. The general is perhaps a little overdressed for the occasion.

I know, I’ve had to bookmark the site after spending the last two hours on the Pacific page!

Damn you, Dr.!

Few more, same site

D-Day

& some from Vietnam

Nam

Some great photos there. That photo of the B-29 Dauntless Dotty. Wasn’t that Bob Morgan’s aircraft?

Steve

A-29 Hudson Wright Cyclone engines based on Lockheed 14
A-28 Hudson P&W Twin Wasp engines based on Lockheed 14
B-34 Ventura P&W R-2800 engines based on Lockheed 18 Lodestar

A-29 or B-34 or Hudson- you choose guys- good stuff though.
I would raise issue with AP taking credit for all of the photos as I know that the USN and USAAF have many of these in their respective archives as does NARA thus placing them in the public domain.

Cheers
Mad Jock