noirish Los Angeles

[JScott]

Originally Posted by Flyingwedge

As Flyingwedge pointed out, the Fort/Broadway City Hall does not exist yet, nor does the Westminster, so the photo here cannot date to later than 1887.

[Flyingwedge]

Originally Posted by BifRayRock

Your reasoning makes sense, but could the date be as late as 1889 or sometime in the 90's? I had my doubts, as suggested by "?" Hellman's 1876-home was replaced by his Bank in '04 or '05, providing an outside limit. The chronology of most of these photos bears some scrutiny. The Westminster Hotel, across from the Hellman Home was recently covered here: http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/show...ostcount=15797

No. The buildings I named and gave dates of construction for preclude the photo from having been taken in the expanded timeframe you suggest.

For example, you mention the Hotel Westminster. Here's an article in the January 29, 1888, LA Herald about the Hotel Westminster almost being ready to open: http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lc...arRange&page=1

So the hotel building was mostly constructed in 1887. If the photo had been taken after probably mid-1887, we'd see the Westminster being built.

[GaylordWilshire]

LAT


The Southwest Land Co created a certain cachet around the name 'Vermont' with the success of its first 'Vermont Ave Square' tract (bb Vermont, Normandie, Vernon & 48th). Their holdings and the name Vermont were soon extended south to 51st St and west to Van Ness (48th St was made wider to serve as a principal east-west street). It seems that after each new 'Vermont' tract's initial offering, it all became Vermont Square--even 'New Vermont Square', north of Vernon and a long way from Vermont Ave., as seen in the 1911 ads above (it was confusingly marked not 'New Vermont Square' but rather 'Vermont Ave Square' on insurance maps). Other developers 'borrowed' the Vermont name. The Times now appears to place the boundaries of the district as Santa Barbara-MLK. 54th St, Van Ness to the Harbor Fwy.

[Tourmaline]

Originally Posted by Flyingwedge

Here's the photo again:


I'm going to stick my neck out and say this photo dates to 1882-1886.

In accord with your estimated dates. Still, the photo's perspective, especially height and direction, raise a few questions.

The camera was clearly elevated. Probably beyond two stories. Given the slow shutter speeds of the era, the heavy camera was also stationary, and not suspended from a Thaddeus Lowe machine. Since the field is wide, it is also likely that a wide angle lens was employed, suggesting the camera was not further south than 4th and Main. Was the camera on makeshift platform - erected for the shot - or could the cameraman have made use of preexisting/ongoing construction? Because a building is not in view doesn't preclude the possibility of its existence, or partial existence. Also, it might be helpful to see the original negative as the photo looks cropped to me.

[JScott]

Originally Posted by Tourmaline

the photo's perspective, especially height and direction, raise a few questions.

I wondered about the vantage point, too. Main does jog a little to the west south of 7th, so that could account for the middle-of-the-street perspective. The elevation, however, seems to me more like 5 or even 6 storeys high, and I'm reasonably certain that no building that tall existed on Main south of 7th at the time this photo was taken. Nor would I think it practical for a photographer to erect a structure that tall simply to take a pretty picture of Main Street. So, my best guess is that it was taken from a stationary hot air balloon.

[Tourmaline]

Originally Posted by BifRayRock

1887, Hellman's abode. Corner of Main and Fourth. From Roof of Westminster Hotel probably focusing on Fourth.

Can't see it? Go here: http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/si...d/3453/rec/526







Circa 1895
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...M58PVCB4GV.jpg

Originally Posted by JScott

I wondered about the vantage point, too. Main does jog a little to the west south of 7th, so that could account for the middle-of-the-street perspective. The elevation, however, seems to me more like 5 or even 6 storeys high, and I'm reasonably certain that no building that tall existed on Main south of 7th at the time this photo was taken. Nor would I think it practical for a photographer to erect a structure that tall simply to take a pretty picture of Main Street. So, my best guess is that it was taken from a stationary hot air balloon.

Glad I am not the only one who muses about highs and lows.


The pictures taken from the Westminster strongly suggest - to my amateur eyes - the possibility that the W somehow factored into the photo that raised so many questions. On the subject of dating and placing downtown landmarks, I defer to those with superior knowledge of the area, such as yourself and Flying W. But some coincidences are hard to ignore. Of course, the photo could have been part of a pre-construction environmental impact study or something to establish the anticipated view from the Westminster. And, there were those rarely-discussed "sightings" after those kegs went missing from the Eastside Brewery.






PS. Surprised no one has mentioned Sinai's cry for attention, or an apparent desire to emulate Laurel Canyon and go trackless.
http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townn...9cb0.image.jpg

[JScott]

Originally Posted by Tourmaline

Glad I am not the only one who muses about highs and lows.


The pictures taken from the Westminster strongly suggest - to my amateur eyes - the possibility that the W somehow factored into the photo that raised so many questions. On the subject of dating and placing downtown landmarks, I defer to those with superior knowledge of the area, such as yourself and Flying W. But some coincidences are hard to ignore. Of course, the photo could have been part of a pre-construction environmental impact study or something to establish the anticipated view from the Westminster. And, there were those rarely-discussed "sightings" after those kegs went missing from the Eastside Brewery.

The height looks similar, but St. Vibiana's is too far away here for the vantage point to be Main and 4th. That placement also doesn't account for City Hall not being in the photo. I think I can just barely make out the synagogue that was right next door to City Hall, but built several years earlier. I do agree the photo appears to be cropped, but there's enough room near the left edge for City Hall to show up if it actually was there. (The Court House should be visible on Pound Cake, too, if this were 1888 or later.)

BTW, a hot air balloon can be made quite stationary by securing three ropes 120 degrees apart around the circumference of the gondola, then staking those ropes on the ground at the points of an equilateral triangle. The lift provided by the hot air would pull on all three ropes with equal force, thereby creating a 'tripod' of virtually any height desired. On a calm day, such a airborne platform would be just about as stable as if one were standing on the ground.

[BifRayRock]

Evidently, aerial photography traces its birth to the mid-1800s. This includes the use of kites, pigeons, rockets (A Nobel 1897) and balloons. http://www.papainternational.org/history.asp




It has been mentioned that Thaddeus Lowe pioneered Civil War Balloon use including field observations and - aerial photography. Curiosity was piqued concerning the 19th century availability of balloons or airships for - as described by JScott. Have to assume that balloons were far from commonplace except as toys until the early 1900s. Having not researched the subject, I am guessing that most photographers/surveyors/cartographers would have left to their own devices. (Goodyear's number was unlisted and Zeppelin was busy elsewhere.) Looking through the '07 directory the only balloon listings refer to public transportation, i.e., The Balloon Excurison (below). However, there are three listings for "aeronauts." Not clear exactly what they flew, or from where. Nevertheless, there is evidence that balloons were used for picture taking in LA in the 1880s. There are ads for balloons in connection with fireworks, but it is unclear whether that refers to a delivery system or a firework type.


Circa 1887 - LA "Air view of Los Angeles on June 27, 1887. Photo was taken from the "Examiner" balloon. Note farmland south of Second Street and east of Main Street to the Los Angeles River. "
(Mission manned or unmanned?)
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics23/00031387.jpg


http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007967.jpg

__________________________

Wake up the children!


1905 - Captain Baldwin's "airship." Ocean Park, Santa Monica
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...6X6VQ7NIV8.jpg

http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...2MNEEM7QX2.jpg


January 1910
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007966.jpg


January 1910 (Which direction to 5th and Main?)
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...E8JEHP15JU.jpg


January 1910 - (Dominguez Hills meet?) Camera on ground level
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...EYBGIMQR98.jpg


Jan 1910 - (All airborne at the same time?) A traffic controller's delight.
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...YKI7677KS8.jpg




http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007970.jpg

http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007930.jpg

__________________________

The Balloon route - evidently had nothing to do with leaving the ground, except for the shape of the route. Some passengers may have experienced some hot air.
http://www.usc.edu/libraries/archive...loon_line.jpeg

[fhammon]

[QUOTE=BifRayRock;6263139][COLOR="Indigo"][SIZE="2"][FONT="Tahoma"]

Circa 1887 - LA "Air view of Los Angeles on June 27, 1887. Photo was taken from the "Examiner" balloon. Note farmland south of Second Street and east of Main Street to the Los Angeles River. "
(Mission manned or unmanned?)
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics23/00031387.jpg

"Floating 9,000 feet above the city in a hot-air balloon, photographer Edwin H. Husher tilted his camera over the basket's edge and captured thirteen views of Los Angeles."

Husher’s voyage was part of an elaborate publicity stunt orchestrated by the San Francisco Examiner and its new owner, William Randolph Hearst.

This article says 13 views were taken. I've only ever seen this one.
Where are the rest of them?

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/20..._first_aer.php

[Flyingwedge]

Originally Posted by Tourmaline

Since the field is wide, it is also likely that a wide angle lens was employed, suggesting the camera was not further south than 4th and Main. Was the camera on makeshift platform - erected for the shot - or could the cameraman have made use of preexisting/ongoing construction? Because a building is not in view doesn't preclude the possibility of its existence, or partial existence.

It does in this case because we're looking at where the Hotel Westminster should be but is not. I agree that exactly where the photo was taken from is in question, but the cross-street in the foreground -- just past the first little cluster of houses on the right side of Main -- is definitely 5th Street. And of course St. Vibiana's in the background is just below the SE corner of Main and 2nd Street:


In the pre-1888 photo, the building with the covered sidewalk on the east side of Main is at the SE corner with Winston, as shown on the Sanborn Map below. If the Westminster were built or building, we'd see it somewhere in the unbuilt area beyond.


1888 Sanborn @ LAPL

It might be possible to nail down the photo's date a little more precisely. In the photo it's not obvious that 4th Street goes through from Main Street to Los Angeles Street (maybe it does; it's hard to tell). According to the LA Times 1881 Map of LA -- which indicates that the site of the Hotel Westminster was then a circus grounds -- it did not:
http://imgzoom.cdlib.org/Fullscreen....and=calisphere

But by 1884, it did:
http://imgzoom.cdlib.org/Fullscreen....z1&&brand=oac4

FWIW, the USC Digital Library dates their copy of the photo to 1877 (actual photo caption says "Probably in the late seventies"), but that's a little early if I'm right about that circled steeple belonging to the 1882 First Presbyterian Church:
http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/si...d/20685/rec/10

Last thought: Considering all the factors, a balloon location for the photographer seems entirely possible and perhaps even likely. I'm just surprised that there doesn't seem to be anyone on the ground looking up at what must have been a relatively novel sight . . . unless everyone is gathered right underneath and therefore out of frame.

[JScott]

Originally Posted by Flyingwedge

FWIW, the USC Digital Library dates their copy of the photo to 1877 (actual photo caption says "Probably in the late seventies"), but that's a little early if I'm right about that circled steeple belonging to the 1882 First Presbyterian Church:
http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/si...d/20685/rec/10

Here's another USC-hosted version of the Main Street panorama we've been discussing:


U.S.C. Digital Library/California Historical Society


This entry gives a date of "c.1882," which I think in light of all the evidence presented thus far pretty much nails it. It also credits the photographer as C.C. Pierce. (Note the C.©P. in foreground.)


Additionally, I happened upon this old panorama of Sixth which looks to have been taken from a similar elevation as the one of Main. Same photo shoot, same location, same day, perhaps?



U.S.C. Digital Library/Dick Whittington Collection

[Flyingwedge]

That's it on the left in 1928, the large house on the corner. We're looking basically east:

USC Digital Library -- http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/co...d/9522/rec/190

BTW, all the b/w USC images posted here are zoomable. You can get in WAY close.

Street view, 1928:

USC Digital Library -- http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/co...d/9522/rec/190

1928 closeup of front door area from different photo than above; note detail of low brick wall:

USC Digital Library -- http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/co...d/9522/rec/190

Probably looking out from the back of the same house, 1927 (note detail of low brick wall). I think this patio is on the east side of the house, perhaps in the back corner:

USC Digital Library -- http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/co.../74048/rec/113

"A" marks 2720 Monte Mar Terrace. The patio in the photo above looks out over where Beverwil Drive is today. The little ravine behind the oil derrick must be where the street is now that leads up to Circle Park:

Google Map with Terrain View

And the house in Jan 2011:

GSV

I'm not sure if this 1927 photo was taken from inside 2720 Monte Mar Terrace (the windows don't match those in the front), but it looks at the oil facilities from almost the same angle as the patio photo:

USC Digital Library -- http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/co...d/5640/rec/111

2720 Monte Mar Terrace was apparently owned for a time by actress Agnes Moorehead: http://aggiespicturepalace.blogspot....ouse-home.html

[GaylordWilshire]

LATimes May 30, 1926


Looks like Forrester also developed the subdivision--there's a "Forrester Drive" nearby. (Interestingly, the neighborhood is referred to as being in "Brentwood" in some references back then.) Looks like he tangled with Mrs. Rindge over the oil operations we see in the picture...

LATimes May 30, 1927


Some of Forrester's earlier developments are noted in this article:
LATimes Feb 8, 1920

His father, E.A. Forrester, is also mentioned--he lived at 1121 S. Lake Street, as did Fred before he moved to Monte Mar Terrace. We've seen two of E.A.'s houses here before:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=9052

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=9063

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=9064

I had forgotten rick m's suggestion in one of the posts above of a Forrester connection to Brenda Allen...but I don't think their was actually one. (Did we ever dig into such it a connection?)

(Speaking of Lake Street: http://losangeleshistory.blogspot.co...-also-see.html and http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=2027)


I was also curious about the other house seen in the vintage shot--2728 MConnell Drive. It's still there:

GSV


It looks like Agnes Moorehead bought the house in 1945. Here's a little noirish Agnes from her time at 2720:

LATimes Oct 4, 1950

Articles: LAT


PS

Thought of you this morning, ER--corner of Church and Chambers this morning.

[BifRayRock]

Originally Posted by JScott

Here's another USC-hosted version of the Main Street panorama we've been discussing:


U.S.C. Digital Library/California Historical Society


This entry gives a date of "c.1882," which I think in light of all the evidence presented thus far pretty much nails it. It also credits the photographer as C.C. Pierce. (Note the C.©P. in foreground.)

Thanks for the continued interest in this easily ignored photo. I revisited the source for my post (LAPL) and the attribution to a Dutch-born photographer named Mauritz de Haaff. He was born in 1878 and, in '09, had a photo studio at 406 S Main St. http://rescarta.lapl.org:8080/ResCar...=photographers (Also noticed an unrelated listing for "Western Kodakery" at 455 N. Broadway, leaving little doubt as to film stock preference.)

Concerning the Haaff attribution, I wonder if it was a simple mistake, or whether Haaff was connected with CCPierce. The community being as small as it was, photographers could have been friendly rivals whose lives and work occasionally intersected. Haaff-attributed photos are far fewer than Pierce attributions. A few are familiar and seem to feature a quasi-bird's eye view.


A purported sampling? (Apparently, Haaff mark appears on the back of his prints.)


http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/utils/...aff&DMROTATE=0


1908 ??? LA Landscape??
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...3FI6CVPKE8.jpg


1908 - "Oil wells and houses West Lake Park."
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...S51HLDXA9V.jpg




190_(?) Spring and Fourth.
http://jpg2.lapl.org/pics09/00014279.jpg

LAPL labels this photo of Venice Boardwalk as 1934. They may be off by decades.
http://jpg2.lapl.org/pics45/00057204.jpg

1905 - Looking south on Broadway.
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...M6C3TL4RCF.jpg

1905 - The Baltimore Building (7th and Olive - Ground level perspective).
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/exlibr...9M28NTXK9L.jpg


1915 - Hotel Munn, attributed to Haaff, originally posted one or two times on this thread, e.g., http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/show...ostcount=12062

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/839...5bunkeroli.jpg





1910 - a Street in Orange, CA

A large California pepper tree is visible in the right foreground. Ink stamped on reverse with "M. de HAAFF / PHOTOGRAPHER / 399 Wilcox Annex, 212 So. Spring St. / HOME PHONE 6040 / LOS ANGELES, CAL."

http://imgzoom.cdlib.org/Converter?i...0&w=1024&h=736

[AlvaroLegido]

Originally Posted by Beaudry

The Wales not long before its demolition --
calstatelibrary

Hi Beaudry. You are our Bunker Hill expert (as MichaelRyerson on Fort Hill and Tovangar on the Plaza/Old Chinatown) ! Please tell me what is this street which drops on Olive in front of the Wales. We've never seen it on the thread. Maybe it's just an entrance way to a building ?

[ethereal_reality]

Originally Posted by GaylordWilshire

PS

Thought of you this morning, ER--corner of Church and Chambers, NYC

I heard there's a large banner of Magritte's 'Le fils de l'homme' ('The Son of Man) somewhere in the vicinity of Los Angeles' Pershing Square. Has anyone here seen it? (a new forum member emailed me about it, and now my curiosity is up)
__

[ethereal_reality]

posted earlier by Flyingwedge

google maps

I don't know this area very well, so I thought I'd check out Circle Park.

Does anyone know what this is in the park? My first thought was penguin pool. lol

google aerial


Here it is from the street.

google street view
__


Also, Airdrome Street caught my eye. (it runs from Rexford Drive east to Ellsmere Avenue)
I am trying to remember if there was an early aviation facility in this area east of Cheviot Hills.
__

[ethereal_reality]

http://www.charlesphoenix.com/

It looks like that might be a Bekins Storage building behind the billboard. Does anyone have any idea where this could have been taken?
The Bekins buildings I'm familiar with are taller than this one.
_

[Ploni]

Finally, something I can comment on!

In the middle of Circle Park is a fountain, the park is "private" with signs saying its open to members of the Beverlywood HOA...

Regarding Airdrome, I've researched that pretty extensively and from what I can tell there was never an airport around there. In 1923, it was named Sixteenth Street...according to a tract map I have.

Looking at original tract maps from the 1920's, I found that Airdrome east of Roberston Blvd originally included a Pacific Electric right of way on the south side of the street all the way to Venice Blvd, but was never used. Eventually, it looks like additional homes were added on the ends of the streets over the right of way, making it a narrow street with sidewalks only on the north side.

Why they called it Airdrome? I haven't been able to figure that out.

(I have been looking for street-level pictures of this area for a number of years...with no luck so far.)

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality

posted earlier by Flyingwedge

google maps

I don't know this area very well, so I thought I'd check out Circle Park.

Does anyone know what this is in the park? My first thought was penguin pool. lol

google aerial


Here it is from the street.

google street view
__


Also, Airdrome Street caught my eye. (it runs from Rexford Drive east to Ellsmere Avenue)
I am trying to remember if there was an early aviation facility in this area east of Cheviot Hills.
__

[ethereal_reality]

Thanks for the information Ploni. -much appreciated.