A photograph of Jesus

by Chris Bertram on December 11, 2008

Via The Online Photographer , Laurie Hill’s film about the things people request from the Hulton Archive:

{ 14 comments }

1

Zamfir 12.11.08 at 8:09 am

Nice. Although I was under the impression that there are almost no pictures of Armstrong on the moon at all, even ones without his 11 fellow astronauts standing by, because he was the one helding the camera.

2

notedscholar 12.11.08 at 7:37 pm

That’s pretty crazy that someone would request a photo of Jesus.

He lived a long time ago. And even if there WAS a photograph, it would be too overly damaged by now.

NS
http://sciencedefeated.wordpress.com/

3

Antti Nannimus 12.11.08 at 8:05 pm

Hi,

Yeah, the only known picture remaining is the one of him at supper where everyone had to get on the same side of the table to get in the photo. Even that picture has a big hole through the bottom now.

Have a nice day,
Antti

4

Gene O'Grady 12.11.08 at 9:30 pm

It would be more fun to compile a list of things you can’t believe would exist that do exist — for instance, apparently there are handwritten notes extant by Saint Francis of Assisi and Bar-Kochba. No photos of either one, of course.

5

stuart 12.11.08 at 11:13 pm

But where Hulton fails to find a picture of Jesus, Google Image search finds hundreds, like here for example.

6

Bruce Wilder 12.11.08 at 11:33 pm

Reference is made to telescopic lenses not existing at the time of the Battle of Britain (1940). Conventional history asserts that the telephoto lens was invented in 1891.

7

Righteous Bubba 12.12.08 at 1:40 am

That was a wonderful film and thank you for it. Passing it on.

8

Harry 12.12.08 at 2:05 am

I remember an AM radio station in my youth that offered autographed photographs of Jesus. I should have sent for one.

9

Witt 12.12.08 at 3:57 am

Lovely; thanks for sharing.

One of the best I ever got was a parent/child pair who simply could not believe that there was no photo of Pocahontas with which to illustrate the youngster’s school project. No amount of calm and patient explanation would suffice. It’s as if they thought I was deliberately holding out on them.

The other (not image-related) is the absolutely astonishing number of people in the world who think there is The Dictionary, and only one. They will call you up to settle an argument on whether a word is listed, and simply will not tolerate the merest suggestion that two dictionaries might answer the question differently. Is it in The Dictionary, they want to know, and preferably yes. Or no. Depending on which way they’ve bet.

10

Matt McGrattan 12.12.08 at 8:09 am

Bruce Wilder is right that the speaker has no clue about the history of photography and the invention of telephoto lenses. You could buy 400mm lenses for 35mm cameras by the mid 1930s. There are also quite a lot of [shaky] gun camera photographs of dog fights in the Battle of Britain.

11

Andrew Brown 12.12.08 at 2:29 pm

I once was sent a photograph of Jesus, when I was the religious correspondent of the Independent. It was an ordinary enprint. He was in a market in Mombasa, wearing a headdress of some kind that obscured his features. I lost it in a move.

12

MarkUp 12.12.08 at 3:23 pm

”when I was the [….] I lost it in a move.”

Coincidence?

13

Frank 12.12.08 at 7:49 pm

Could it have been this bloke, Andrew:

http://www.share-international.org/images/nairobi3.gif

14

rea 12.14.08 at 2:20 pm

Well, if there were a photograph of Jesus, it would be a miracle, right? And these people believe that Jesus can work miracles if he wants to. Therefore, asking for a photograph of Jesus is not such an unreasonable request as might at first appear. . .

Comments on this entry are closed.