This short demonstrates how sometimes simpler is better, and that good acting and straight ahead storytelling are often better than over-the-top action and visual effects in 3d animation. Enjoy!
Never knew this. I always thought they didn't smile because they would have to hold it for the entire exposure time, risking the chance of blurriness in the picture.
Quoting a 17th century European source about 19th century American photographs seems rather silly and pointless. In the course of my historical research, I read entire runs of newspapers from the 19th century on Google Newspaper archive and this issue did, in fact, come up in an opinion piece (sadly, I don't recall the paper but it was probably one from Nova Scotia.) The writer opined, much as Twain did, that it was risky to have to hold a smile until it looked forced, fixed, and frozen (and stupid), so, even though it made people look grim, they usually chose to simply let the face relax as naturally as possible so the position could be held. Photographs were expensive and people were loath to take a risk of spending the money on something that would look foolish.
Comments (3)
And they didn't bathe either back then.