Mark Holtom (aka Kingbeard)MarkHoltom
Jan 15, 2025, 8:19 AMWe've all seen the photo of the guy looking over his shoulder at the other girl whilst his girlfriend looks on in disgust.
Well, here's the original
Replies
Simon 🐮:spot:Firesphere@cloudisland.nzJan 15, 2025, 10:39 AM@MarkHoltom Here's the duck version
SeiðrIlluminatus@mstdn.socialJan 15, 2025, 11:06 AM@MarkHoltom That's USMC propaganda aganst the USN, for sure. XD
Eh?!?Eh__tweet@mastodon.unoJan 15, 2025, 11:14 AM@MarkHoltom
The most relevant thing, IMO, is that in this photo the (gender) roles are reversed.
Yet, can we date the sailor/sergeant photo?
Chaplin's version is from 1922:
https://www.charliechaplin.com/en/infos/744-Meet-the-OG-Distracted-Boyfriend
Joshjoshef@mastodon.socialJan 15, 2025, 11:20 AMSgt. Looks like Cary Grant.
Rob :bisexual_flag: robchapman@ohai.socialJan 15, 2025, 11:50 AM@MarkHoltom She was definitely admiring a his well tailored caboose
James Wellsnikatjef@mastodon.acm.orgJan 15, 2025, 12:34 PM@MarkHoltom
IIRC, the idea wasn't so much that he was a sergeant, but that he was a US Marine.
@Skepticat
xs4me2xs4me2@mastodon.socialJan 15, 2025, 12:46 PMMarine vs sailor ;)
econadseconads@mendeddrum.orgJan 15, 2025, 1:48 PM@MarkHoltom
He doesn't look so offended, it's more like "come on Delores, that's enough of that now"
NazaniNazani@universeodon.comJan 15, 2025, 2:39 PM@MarkHoltom
I wouldn't impute any motive at all to the woman turning around. Maybe the Marine said something to her in passing. We have no context; guessing says more about your assumptions than about what actually happened.
Pseudo Nympseudonym@mastodon.onlineJan 15, 2025, 3:41 PMI'd love to know the origin of this picture. While I believe the Charlie Chaplin one to be legit, this looks, to my eyes, like a very well done AI fake.
There is an uncanny valley sense to the filter, like it's trying too hard for that old timey look.
Something is definitely wrong with the creases, wrinkles, and folds on the leg on the left hand side of the picture.
The faces at the different focal lengths are just too clear and crisp.
It's a great copy though. I may be wrong
Walrus 🏴Walrus@toot.walesJan 15, 2025, 4:56 PMI think you may be right. Normally, when I use Google Lens to search for a picture, it finds copies all over the interwebthing. This picture seems to be only in Kingbeards's post.
Update: The Internet Archive has the magazine it was in, as @awinkler has said.
- Pseudo Nympseudonym@mastodon.onlineJan 16, 2025, 3:14 PM
- Walrus 🏴Walrus@toot.walesJan 16, 2025, 3:17 PM
@pseudonym @MarkHoltom @awinkler
Takeaway from all this... the Internet Archive probably discourages scraping, and Google may actually respect that.
Alexander Winklerawinkler@openbiblio.socialJan 15, 2025, 9:14 PM@pseudonym @MarkHoltom according to #bbc it's to be found in a magazine from the 50s, so pre AI. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-47329122
- Pseudo Nympseudonym@mastodon.onlineJan 15, 2025, 9:19 PM
Awesome! Kind of happy to be wrong. Thanks for the detective work.
- Pseudo Nympseudonym@mastodon.onlineJan 15, 2025, 9:31 PM
Darn it. I found the October 1950 Leatherneck on Internet archive scans (please donate to support them) and I don't see this picture in there, and comparing it to how the scans look, I'm more convinced this is contrived, and the BBC may have been taken in as well.
https://archive.org/details/sim_leatherneck_1950-10_33_10/page/n68/mode/1up
Can anyone spot it in there? Always possible I missed it scrolling
[Edit: I missed it scrolling. Page 57/58]
- Alexander Winklerawinkler@openbiblio.socialJan 15, 2025, 10:01 PM
- Pseudo Nympseudonym@mastodon.onlineJan 15, 2025, 11:04 PM
Thank you!
I'll blame age and eyes. I scrolled through the whole thing and skipped right over that.
Faith in humanity and fact checking restored.
Thank you!
- Alexander Winklerawinkler@openbiblio.socialJan 16, 2025, 6:08 AM
@pseudonym @MarkHoltom I think that also shows us how great it would be if people used the advantages of hypertext more regularly. Had BBC and other included a link to the openly available internet resource, people could easily verify its authenticity, get acquainted with historical sources and discover - who knows- other interesting stuff. So please everybody, cite sources, use references :-)
Jan 15, 2025, 4:35 PM@MarkHoltom apparently that one’s October 1950, here’s another one https://twoot.site/@TicklishHoneyBee/113808637077528423
Feb 5, 2025, 9:34 PM@MarkHoltom@mastodonapp.uk If you've ever had cause to sort through red carpet photos it's amazing how often there is someone who's sneaking a glance in the background.
