Not really large, as I asked last time this was uploaded, the picture is taken with a rather wide angle lens, perhaps even a 'fish-eye' type, and that exagerates the size of the building to the human eye; many people have an angle of awareness of (as I do) 210 degrees, but the angle of observable vision is limited to 30 degrees or less, outside of that the perspective is distorted. To the human eye it therefore looks large and massive. The building is the same size (near enough) as the one that is there now, but to my mind a better designed building then.
We had the same problems years ago with some flats in London - Montague Tibbles, a whole estate of blocks ... the photographs looked fine, until I saw the buildings, they stretched way beyound vision and so they looked all of a sudden normal; the camera does not lie we are told ... if you know the fact surrounding it all, it does not, and nowadays it is even less of a truth with what can be done in manipulation, people cars, clouds can all be changed, without the use of extra negatives, paddles or filters. ))
I understand the distortion of the image, etc. I meant I didn't realise the building extended up to Bread Street having only ever seen pictures of the very front of the building! This was all knocked down and rebuilt probably before I was even thought of. ::3:
One memory that I have was that I went in their photographic section to get my pictures DandP from my early London trips, the early European trips, used to also get the office photos done in there, we moved to Buriton House in c 1976; it must have been around then Timothy Whites moved down to the corner .
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
