[rerevisionist]

Black and white films of 'nukes', with model houses purporting to be nuclear blasts, use negatives to get unfamiliar effects - see for example this youtube, which is typical of the short inserts put into propaganda films:--


Some 'nuke' smoke clouds, filmed in black and white, get their strange unearthly effect by being negative - maybe that still image (shown below, negative) was taken at night, printed as a negative, and retouched a bit?

This would be much less easy with colour film, because odd colours would make it obviously negative.

[rerevisionist]

Exorcist - highly original work and convincing, though it ideally needs (imho) examination of the original prints (or better still negatives) to check more certainly that the steel is drawn in; the online versions that I've seen aren't very high resolution.

Not for the first time I wish official experts, in this case in building construction, would comment. ...

Ingenious stuff - I hope you don't mind my editing down to get to the crux--

... "fake" steelwork has been added by the Allied propagandists. You may ask "WHY ON EARTH WOULD THEY WISH TO DO THIS?" ... the answer is obvious. They wished to give the impression that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were relatively undamaged before they allegedly dropped the fake nuke. I am suggesting ... Hiroshima and Nagasaki had already been "Tokyoed" with conventional bombs and fire bombs months before.

When they sent in the photo team to provide "fake" evidence for the "fake" A bomb blast they found, to their dismay that the steelwork in the bombed out buildings had been removed months before by the Japanese for reuse in their armament industry. ... If the Allies provided photos showing no trace of roof steelwork then people would notice and start asking awkward questions so they added it in. ...

... warning leaflets ... would have drawn the attention of people in and around Nagasaki and Hiroshima ... the Japanese Gov. ... wanted to surrender months before. [See video, below] I seem to recall "cactusneedle?" stating the allies imposed a 12 month clampdown on all news coming out of Japan after the surrender.

The Japanese elite were secretly given the choice of supporting the A Bomb hoax and continuing in power or facing a Japanese "Nuremburg Trial".

My note: If Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been bombed before, the question is why those two towns were selected, as any others might have been; and indeed whether there were bombing raids at all on the offical dates. Maybe they were selected because they were near the coast, or hemmed in by mountains, so that there would be fewer witnesses, if nothing special happened; or maybe they were selected because they had tame witnesses who could be relied on to invent supporting detail - such as that Catholic priest in Nagasaki; or maybe they were far enough apart that if people were puzzled about their own town not being nuked, they could be persuaded it happened in another town. Maybe there were big bombs dropped, maybe dummies - they had dummy bomb tests. And why two towns? I suppose it looks more convincing than a one-off.

David Irving on documentary history of Truman giving 'the order':--

[Exorcist]

Exorcist - highly original work and convincing, though it ideally needs (imho) examination of the original prints (or better still negatives) to check more certainly that the steel is drawn in; the online versions that I've seen aren't very high resolution.

I doubt whether there would be any mileage in this. These fakes were probably produced as follows. Make enlarged prints of the conventional explosive/incendiary damage photos of Hiroshima. Draw in the steelwork on the enlarged print and add cuttings from other photos eg the tranformer parts. Take a photo of the montage. The original "artwork" would then be destroyed. A "photo of a photo" would explain the fuzzy low resolution and lack of clear detail present in many of these fakes.

The low resolution is desirable from the faker's point of view but is a double edged sword. These photographs were supposed to be taken by professionals. We are justified in asking "How did these "professionals" manage to produce so many photographs in which the focusing and detail are so poor"? I think there is only one believable answer to that!

Unfortunately for the fakers the rules of perspective still apply to fuzzy photos of photos. Neither will a fuzzy photo hide their lack of understanding of building structure. I'll post an example of an obvious "montage" in my next photo analysis post.

It's the Shimonura Watch Shop which also features in the US Strategic Bombing Survey as Building No. 46.

[FirstClassSkeptic]

It looks to me like you're missing the obvious, in all of your talk about perspective and such. In a fire, steel sags, twists, distorts. The steel beams here are perfectly straight in all the pictures, except the one. Either the steel structure was drawn in, as you suggest, or real steel was put up, and a picture taken of it.

Are there pictures of these buildings before the bombing? Of course, they could be buildings anywhere; maybe not even in Japan. Some of the buildings look like they should have a flat roof, not a peaked roof.

[Exorcist]

It looks to me like you're missing the obvious, in all of your talk about perspective and such. In a fire, steel sags, twists, distorts. The steel beams here are perfectly straight in all the pictures, except the one. Either the steel structure was drawn in, as you suggest, or real steel was put up, and a picture taken of it.

Are there pictures of these buildings before the bombing? Of course, they could be buildings anywhere; maybe not even in Japan. Some of the buildings look like they should have a flat roof, not a peaked roof.

I am not "missing the obvious". If real steel was put up the other photos would not fail my perspective test. The steel has been "drawn in" and perspective analysis is a valid scientific method of proving this.
If you study the internal photo you will see there is no evidence of this building being destroyed by fire. No blackening of the internal concrete walls and, on the external shots of the concrete walls, no scorch marks on the periphery of the windows. This building was destroyed by conventional HE bombs and the steelwork salvaged by the Japanese well before August 1945.

[FirstClassSkeptic]

After looking at this some more, I think this photo shows the result of water washing over the bridge repeatedly, from one direction, and leaving a stain.

[Exorcist]

Correction...I should have typed M69 cluster fire bombs......not M16