Time traveller caught in 1940 photo?

[Lenny]

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/1/201004161615.jpg
http://www.boingboing.net/201004161615.jpg

The above photo was taken in 1940. Some people say the hipster-looking fellow with the sunglasses on the right side of the photo is a time traveller because his hair, shades, clothing, and camera didn't exist at the time.

But Forgetomori does a fine job of busting this rumor. Curses!

The outfit could also be found 70 years ago. Being used as we are to our contemporary fashion, we look at the man and assume he’s wearing a stamped T-shirt, something that would be indeed out of place (or time). But if you look carefully, you can see that he’s actually wearing (or could as well be wearing) a sweatshirt. And sweatshirts with bordered emblems were not uncommon in the 1940s – in fact you can find those in other photos from the same exhibit.

link (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/16/time-traveler-caught-1.html)

[Lenny]

Some of the good comments:

Wait, so you're saying that people think the ironic hipster look is somehow original and unprecedented?
That's so...cute.

I'm definitely not convinced that in 1940 his look would have been considered 'hip'.

But how do you explain the iPod he is cueing up?

The scariest thing about this is that guy - completely unaware until now that he will travel back to 1940 in the future - has probably just chanced on this blog post, and is seriously freaking.

Hipsters would never be the ones to master time travel technology. So that alone dis-counts this whole theory.

The working man's clothes of the 19th and early to mid 20th century have been embraced by the gentry of the late 20th and so far, the early 21st century, even as the income gap widens between the classes in the U.S.A. The working man's clothes have always been sexier than banker's suits. Think Levi's, Hensleys, etc. And maybe said clothing acts as a disguise for those who don't care to flaunt their wealth even though their jeans cost $1,500.

Grandpa looked cool. What, so hipsters are just mad that their father's father wore edgier things than them? Awww...


"This has been digitally-altered, because the shadow on the ear is not realistic"Oh, and no one in history has ever had their ears stick out comically?

Do an image search for "stick out ears" or "ears stick out" and you'll get plenty of pictures of people with unusually prominent earlobes. Which is more likely? That a museum-certified photograph was digitally altered to insert an anachronistic figure for no apparent reason? Or that the guy is just a little strange and has ears that stick out a tad oddly?

sun glasses exist in China something in the 1300s. Shades did not become popular in the US until the 1940s.

How about now?
http://www.rickcortes.com/timetraveler2.jpg
:)

[Autobahn]

The outfit could also be found 70 years ago. Being used as we are to our contemporary fashion, we look at the man and assume he’s wearing a stamped T-shirt, something that would be indeed out of place (or time). But if you look carefully, you can see that he’s actually wearing (or could as well be wearing) a sweatshirt. And sweatshirts with bordered emblems were not uncommon in the 1940s – in fact you can find those in other photos from the same exhibit.


Whether that was the fashion of the day or not, the materials for his clothing indeed existed at the time. That photo proves nothing.

[Absinthe]

Photoshop? :p

[Autobahn]

Photoshop? :p

I was also considering that possibility, as well.:rolleyes2:

[Tabiti]

So fake...

[Angharad]

I don't think his sweater/jacket looks too modern, it seems to have a collar. There are examples of printed t-shirts in the 40's, like this one.

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/7500/rope.jpg

It looks like a letterman sweater to me, so normal for a young man. I even have seen photos of people in the 30's in sweats. Sunglasses did exist too, but were not as common.

[Lenny]

@People who say it is "fake", photoshopped, etc.: I call your attention to this from a commenter on the site. (He is replying to the same claim coming from another commenter):


"This must have been digitally-altered, because the shadow on the ear is not realistic..."
Oh, and no one in history has ever had their ears stick out comically?

Do an image search for "stick out ears" or "ears stick out" and you'll get plenty of pictures of people with unusually prominent earlobes. Which is more likely? That a museum-certified photograph was digitally altered to insert an anachronistic figure for no apparent reason? Or that the guy is just a little strange and has ears that stick out a tad oddly?



I think it's really neat that a guy was walking around in 1940 who looks like he belongs decades later, even 70 years later.

The Lesson: Be careful of mocking people who have odd fashion senses. They may just get the last laugh when it turns out that fashion by 2080 has gone their way and you are the one looking like a dinosaur in old photos! :p