Connecticut town on the sea, probably Stonington (LOC)

Prev Next

Delano, Jack,, photographer.

Connecticut town on the sea, probably Stonington

1940 Nov.

1 slide : color.

Notes:
Title from FSA or OWI agency caption.
Transfer from U.S. Office of War Information, 1944.

Subjects:
United States--Connecticut--Stonington (Town)

Format: Slides--Color

Rights Info: No known restrictions on publication.

Repository: Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA, hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.print

Part Of: Farm Security Administration - Office of War Information Collection 11671-2 (DLC) 93845501

General information about the FSA/OWI Color Photographs is available at hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.fsac

Higher resolution image is available (Persistent URL): hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/fsac.1a33831

Call Number: LC-USF35-31

Billiard, taomancer, Mike Moore, and 138 other people added this photo to their favorites.

  1. Ben @ Conservation Commission 87 months ago | reply

    View to the northeast from 5 Water Street or further south. Shows 1 Hancox Street, 15 Omega Street and portions of 9 Omega Street and 1 School Street. Salt Acres (40-44 Salt Acres Road) is seen in distance as well as houses on Elihue, South and Bradley Streets. Erosion seen on lighthouse grounds in middle ground (7 Water Street) -- a seawall has since been constructed. A fire appears to be burning on the beach at right.

  2. Zacker The One and Only 87 months ago | reply

    wow what an amazing photo.... great detail in such an oldie!
    thanks for sharing these, i can see ill be spending TONS of time on this site!!

  3. parkopudn25 84 months ago | reply

    amaziiiiing, what a sky...

  4. Jon Melville 82 months ago | reply

    I agree with the note!

  5. Erin Nicole :) [deleted] 75 months ago | reply

    oh yeah there totally "photoshopped"
    how is that photoshopped

  6. WetMogwai [deleted] 72 months ago | reply

    I love how people think old photos are photoshopped. They've probably never seen properly exposed slide film before. It just shows how people have lowered their expectations because of digital and why I am shooting more and more film.

  7. kiwi_michael 71 months ago | reply

    Have to agree with Wetmogwai and Erin - why someone would want to display their ignorance with stupid notes on a beautiful Kodachrome like this is beyond me. Just plain dumb.
    Best thing about colour reversal? You release the shutter & the work is done - no need to muck about in the darkroom or at the 'puter. All you need is a light box, a lupe and a big waste basket for all the also-rans.

  8. David Sr. - 37 months ago | reply

    FYI - My "Photoshoped" note was totally tongue-in-cheek! Duh.. this is a Library of Congress photo that is OBVIOUSLY (at least to me) the original scanned in photo created pre-digital... Sorry for the confusion! I will add a smiley face to hopefully emphasize the jest!

  9. loganzillmer 22 months ago | reply

    I'm blown away by the dynamic range of old slide film. It looks amazing.

  10. kafrisoli 17 months ago | reply

    1 Hancox Street (the house in the middle of the photo, right by the water) is the house we now own! It's only been in my family for the past 8 years or so. According to the granddaughter of the original owners, the house used to be a fish and chips restaurant. During the Hurricane of 1938, it was one of the only houses still standing. There is a picture of the house with the entire bottom gutted out. To rebuild, the owners made sure the walls were reinforced with concrete and steel, to prevent any future damage to the vulnerable side facing the ocean. Also, photographer Rollie McKenna also lived there!

keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts