Famous WWI Photo debunked.

[PlaceOfBayonets]

Check it out guys. History revised. I have seen this in at least two of my books.

http://www.pickelhauben.net/articles...%20picture.htm

W.

[Paul McKee]

Not too much unlike the popular Ken Burn's Civil War documentary on public television...many photos enlisted as stand-ins when the real deal was unavailable. The important thing was dramatic effect and maintaining the narrative. The general viewing public was none the wiser and was entertained.

Paul

[Jean-Loup]

There are a lot of famous WW1 photographs that I would really like to know the history of, taken where, by who, etc. But this info is almost never given in books...

[Jonathan M]

Even documentaries do the same often marrying incorrect film that has nothing to do with the narrative. I mostly find this with references to the panzers. They'll be taling about Tigers and the film running would be that famous one of a Pz IVD coming through a leafy copse of trees

Jonathan

[Don D.]

You even see it on the news. When they don't have current stuff on an event they will roll some "stock footage."

[paddywhack]

Even documentaries do the same often marrying incorrect film that has nothing to do with the narrative. I mostly find this with references to the panzers. They'll be taling about Tigers and the film running would be that famous one of a Pz IVD coming through a leafy copse of trees

Jonathan

that really does annoy me! i mean with the internet etc theres really no excuse to start putting the wrong stuff in!i watched a brand new documentary on discovery called battlefield mysteries and on there very first show they were talking about Malta and the air war and then they have clips of 109 attacking b 17 over German and then pics of American carriers in the Pacific and they were simply put there as they were simply lazy!!