Once again, to touch upon the topic of the strangeness of the 18th-19th centuries, this time, there will be photographs from a “bird's eye view”.
Many do not have a very positive attitude to this topic, so I will just write down some facts and my view on this oddity, relatively recent past, and everyone makes full-fledged conclusions for himself.
I have read quite a few alternatives of the 18th century, who simply write about the absence of people in drawings and photographs of the 19th century in St. Petersburg or, for example, Moscow.
I don’t really want to comment on this fact, although this is really strange, since in the pictures of other cities there were people and many traces of active life.
But while studying this topic, I was interested in something else, namely, various paintings by artists with a "bird's eye view", as well as pictures of sufficient quality for that time.
If you look at the photographs from the mid-19th century, you can see a few oddities. First, the quality is not bad, considering that the first cameras appeared some 20-30 years ago.
Promotional video:
Everyone should understand what cameras were then and what quality the pictures should have been from a height. However, now in the pictures of the past, you can see the location of many buildings, streets, cars, etc.
But the most important thing is the height. Images from the mid-19th century show many streets and houses. On some you can see not a small part of the city itself, but no one wondered how they took photos from such a height?
Nowadays, this is most often done from special drones, or in extreme cases, from helicopters. And the first helicopter, according to official history, appeared in 1922, in the United States.
We can say that at least some planes existed then, but this version again does not fit. Only the design of "normal" controlled aircraft began at the very end of the 18th and early 19th centuries.
And if you think about how you took pictures with old cameras in flight on an airplane, could you get such a quality? - I strongly doubt everything would have been smeared.
In the end, we can assume that the person who filmed the city climbed somewhere high, but where? Above an ordinary house, nothing can be imagined, but from such a height you cannot photograph most of the city.
This is not to mention the paintings of various artists, who depicted the whole city from a decent height, the so-called "bird's eye flight".
Moreover, they painted such pictures, not based on imagination, but depicted exactly this or that city. And without special shooting, it is simply impossible to know the location of all buildings.
I will not express my conclusions so as not to offend the worldview and view of the recent history of any of the readers. In the article, I just speculated and gave an interesting topic for thought, the answers to which, it seems to me, are difficult to find, according to the official history.