Source For Actual WWI Aviation Combat Photos

splais · 13 December 2006, 10:24 AM

Does anyone have any links to actual aerial combat photos taken during WWI. The couple of pics I have seen are just incredible. Thanks.

Lufbery · 13 December 2006, 10:53 AM

The first, and maybe the best, place to check is Rosebud's WWI and Early Aviation Image Archive!

I'll caution you as well, there are some pretty well-known aerial combat fakes that have been published. One was even used on the cover of the book, Jane's Fighting Aircraft of WWI.

Regards,

Taz · 13 December 2006, 01:12 PM

splais- Most actual (not faked) combat photos of WW-I action show two aircraft a fair distance apart with the trailing aircraft invisibly shooting at the victim and both aircraft too far away to tell very much from the photo. An exception is some air-to-air shots taken by George Guynemer with his predecessor of the WW-II gun camera. Guynemer's gun camera film has been featured in a couple of books and magazine articles. If I remember correctly, Bernard Klaeyle's book on Guynemer featured these images. Guynemer also pioneered the airborne cannon armed fighter, which resulted in the 37 mm cannon-armed Spad XII.

Paintings by top artists of WW-I aerial combat are probably the most realistic scenes you will see, and I highly recommend you look through the Forum Gallery and enjoy a few. Jim Dietz' From the Heavens is one of my favorites.

Taz
Terry Phillips

splais · 13 December 2006, 02:57 PM

I have one picture (can't remember the source right now) that obviously was taken from the rear seat of an observation plane. the photo appears to be genuine and has several planes in the frame that are in combat. But you are correct about telling real from fake. But i figure there must be some great combat shots out there taken from planes like the Bristal and DH.

Not to denagrate paintings (some of which are great), but they are paintings and just interpretations of reality. Photos are reality, at least to the eye of the camera.

Taz · 13 December 2006, 09:50 PM

splais- I do not think there are any great combat photo shots taken in WW-I which show multiple aircraft. If there were enemy aircraft that close, the observer would be manning a machine-gun and not a camera. Combat photography was at its peak in WW-II when a bomber could carry an extra person whose only job was to record what happened. Not the case in WW-I. Henry Farre was the closest thing to an aerial combat photographer in WW-I, and he was an artist, not a photographer. Cameras are reality only if they are focused, have the right field and depth of view, and have fast enough shutter speed to freeze an image of rapidly moving objects. There are some really nice fakes out there, which were pawned off as real for several decades. Let me know if you find any real combat photos, but I have never seen one.

Taz
Terry Phillips

splais · 14 December 2006, 05:29 AM

Well, I guess you are correct. How on earth can you ever tell. I went to that site mentioned above that says "unconfirmed" actual combat photos. If those are all fakes, my gosh, how could you tell without full labratory examination, because some of them sure look real.

I have read many accounts of aerial combat that refer to several groups of planes involved in combat all in the same area, burt separate actions. They did have aerial cameras by the end of the war. It sure seems like a two seater could often have been flying above or off to the side of action and photographed it. But you are right, pretty primitive time in photography, and just looking I guess you have no way to tell real from fake.

But I bet there are some authenticated photos someplace. May have to contact someplace like Royal Aircraft Museum or such.