Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Location of lamps etc

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JeffHamm
    replied
    Originally posted by kjab3112 View Post
    I've completed the Buck's Row model first version. It's only currently working on Excel 365 (apologies but there are control components that don't work in google sheets and I've not checked for backward compatibility to open calc etc). I've put a download link below. Any questions, suggestions etc please let me know.

    Paul

    https://drive.google.com/uc?export=d...bLLtjWAFMlZ2Be
    Really good work! Thanks for sharing!

    - Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • kjab3112
    replied
    I've completed the Buck's Row model first version. It's only currently working on Excel 365 (apologies but there are control components that don't work in google sheets and I've not checked for backward compatibility to open calc etc). I've put a download link below. Any questions, suggestions etc please let me know.

    Paul

    Leave a comment:


  • drstrange169
    replied
    Looking forward to it, thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • kjab3112
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	121
Size:	30.7 KB
ID:	831556

    I'm not sure I see the point of the light circled as the brewery lights would be supplying light to, more or less, the same area. A light at the Brown and Eagle gateway makes practical sense.
    As Steve says above, the light positions are based on a combination of sources which I’ve put into a model. The one you circle is present in 1873 and there is no definite reason for its removal. Additionally in 1873 there was a lamp opposite the Brown and Eagle gateway on the wall of 9/10 Buck’s Row, which appears to be absent on the sketches and later photographs. The Schneider and Sons light makes more practical sense than one adjacent to Essex Wharf, but I’ve not shared that model, for the position of the lamp shown in the newspaper sketch as opposite the murder scene.

    The full model enables all of the lights excepting those on the southern side of Whitechapel road to be individually adjusted for brightness and whether they are on/present or not. These pictures are an initial draft share.

    Hopefully I’ll have a completed model to demonstrate soon, but compatibility may be problematic due to how I’ve built it.

    Paul

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	121
Size:	30.7 KB
ID:	831556

    I'm not sure I see the point of the light circled as the brewery lights would be supplying light to, more or less, the same area. A light at the Brown and Eagle gateway makes practical sense.
    Hi Dusty,
    Much of this is based on the thread "Polly by gaslight" on JTRFORUMS, which is referenced in post 2 of this thread.

    It was argued in that thread that there is the possibility there was no light at the position you mention close to the junction with Brady Street, lights from the Brewery covering thisthis area as you say.

    There is certainly no mention of a light by Browne and Eagle, although I agree this would seem logical.

    It is therefore possible that there was no light between the lamp to the west of Brown's Yard and Brady Street.
    Like much it's still very unclear.

    Steve




    Leave a comment:


  • drstrange169
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	121
Size:	30.7 KB
ID:	831556

    I'm not sure I see the point of the light circled as the brewery lights would be supplying light to, more or less, the same area. A light at the Brown and Eagle gateway makes practical sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • drstrange169
    replied
    I'm not sure I see the point of the light circled as the brewery lights would be supplying light to, more or less, the same area. A light at the Brown and Eagle gateway makes practical sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffHamm
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

    Perfectly sound reasoning Jeff, my concern, and it's no more than that, with the "and of the row", is that given Neil came from the west, the lamp before might be called the start, rather than the end. however, that's far from conclusive.

    Steve
    Hi Steve,

    Fair point, though as with so much JtR, not conclusive. I could see either end being refered to as an end, and one can say things like "both ends of the row ..." and sound perfectly normal.

    And I agree with your other post indicating how the light levels may not correspond to the image. It is a simulation, and I am familiar enough with those to recognize caution is always required! It is good work for sure, and has got some good discussions going as well, so what more can be asked for?

    - Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

    We also have the unknown issue of how well, if at all the light to the west was working.

    Neil, as mentioned early appears to talk of a lamp some distance away at the end of the row, which does not on the surface seem to fit the light which would be behind him as he walked East along Bucks Row.

    Steve
    Agreed. If the western light was functioning, why would Neil even mention a light at the other end of the block?

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    And of course we must allow for the possibility that the level of illumination was different from the figure Paul has used.

    Great bit of work by him

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

    True, if the western lamp was not functioning then that entire area would be dark until one was well past the board school. On the other hand, while it's suggested Neil appears to mention the lamp to the east, even the lamp to the west is at the end of the row (to more or less the same extent as the eastern one is to its end of the row), and given by the point one reaches the crime scene the light from the western lamp is pretty minimal, it wouldn't be inconceivable that would get described as "some distance away" to indicate that the crime scene was not quite out of range of the lamp. Clearly the eastern lamp, even if working at full capacity, is not going to make one whit of difference to the light at the crime scene. From Fiver's post above, Neil says "It was dark, but there was a Street lamp on the opposite side some distance away.​", it seems to me he's indicating that there was some light in the immediate vicinity, if not a great deal of it. The eastern lamp is too far away to provide any illumination to the area but the western one is close enough to cast some minimal light on the crime scene (which would account for how Cross/Lechmere spots the body in the first place). I think one could argue that it would seem odd of Neil, when discussing the crime location, to mention the eastern one at all given it is clearly not in the vicinity of the crime scene and would have no impact upon it. As such, if the western one was not functioning, it seems he would be apt to describe the area as being without lamps at all, rather than mention a lamp that has no bearing on the area.

    I'm just mulling some thoughts here, and as with all ambiguous descriptions, I can't say I know what Neil was referring to for sure, but I think there's good reason to at least consider he may have been indicating that the western lamp because it would cast minimal light on the crime location while the eastern lamp would have no effect on the crime scene lighting.

    Of course, if we have statements clearly indicating the western lamp was not functioning, than all my above reasoning can be dismissed.

    - Jeff
    Perfectly sound reasoning Jeff, my concern, and it's no more than that, with the "and of the row", is that given Neil came from the west, the lamp before might be called the start, rather than the end. however, that's far from conclusive.

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffHamm
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

    We also have the unknown issue of how well, if at all the light to the west was working.

    Neil, as mentioned early appears to talk of a lamp some distance away at the end of the row, which does not on the surface seem to fit the light which would be behind him as he walked East along Bucks Row.

    Steve
    True, if the western lamp was not functioning then that entire area would be dark until one was well past the board school. On the other hand, while it's suggested Neil appears to mention the lamp to the east, even the lamp to the west is at the end of the row (to more or less the same extent as the eastern one is to its end of the row), and given by the point one reaches the crime scene the light from the western lamp is pretty minimal, it wouldn't be inconceivable that would get described as "some distance away" to indicate that the crime scene was not quite out of range of the lamp. Clearly the eastern lamp, even if working at full capacity, is not going to make one whit of difference to the light at the crime scene. From Fiver's post above, Neil says "It was dark, but there was a Street lamp on the opposite side some distance away.​", it seems to me he's indicating that there was some light in the immediate vicinity, if not a great deal of it. The eastern lamp is too far away to provide any illumination to the area but the western one is close enough to cast some minimal light on the crime scene (which would account for how Cross/Lechmere spots the body in the first place). I think one could argue that it would seem odd of Neil, when discussing the crime location, to mention the eastern one at all given it is clearly not in the vicinity of the crime scene and would have no impact upon it. As such, if the western one was not functioning, it seems he would be apt to describe the area as being without lamps at all, rather than mention a lamp that has no bearing on the area.

    I'm just mulling some thoughts here, and as with all ambiguous descriptions, I can't say I know what Neil was referring to for sure, but I think there's good reason to at least consider he may have been indicating that the western lamp because it would cast minimal light on the crime location while the eastern lamp would have no effect on the crime scene lighting.

    Of course, if we have statements clearly indicating the western lamp was not functioning, than all my above reasoning can be dismissed.

    - Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

    Hi Steve,

    Ah, ok. I think I was thinking of the other version, which had the westerly lamp to the east of the murder location. If the "2nd" lamp was more likely to be west of the crime scene as in this version, then JtR would have to pass through what looks to be a fairly lit up zone, so no slinking away through only darkness with intervening lights helping to mask his exit.

    Of course, if the murder took place around 3:30ish (as some news reports suggest), then the point is moot as JtR would have left the scene long before the arrival of Cross/Lechmere and Paul.

    Thanks for that.

    - Jeff
    We also have the unknown issue of how well, if at all the light to the west was working.

    Neil, as mentioned early appears to talk of a lamp some distance away at the end of the row, which does not on the surface seem to fit the light which would be behind him as he walked East along Bucks Row.

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffHamm
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

    Hi Jeff, missed the follow up on here after I posted the estimated lamp positions in 1888.

    Maybe I am misreading your post, but you talk of a 2nd lamp in Bucks Row. But in 1888 the 2nd lamp is probably to west of the murder site.
    I suspect people are mixing up the two images Paul has produced.
    This is how it very likely was in 1888.

    Steve

    Click image for larger version Name:	image.png Views:	0 Size:	34.6 KB ID:	831498
    Hi Steve,

    Ah, ok. I think I was thinking of the other version, which had the westerly lamp to the east of the murder location. If the "2nd" lamp was more likely to be west of the crime scene as in this version, then JtR would have to pass through what looks to be a fairly lit up zone, so no slinking away through only darkness with intervening lights helping to mask his exit.

    Of course, if the murder took place around 3:30ish (as some news reports suggest), then the point is moot as JtR would have left the scene long before the arrival of Cross/Lechmere and Paul.

    Thanks for that.

    - Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by kjab3112 View Post
    Hi Jeff,

    The way I’ve designed the underlying model allows the illumination level to be adjusted and certain lights to be switched on or off. The assumption I’ve made on these is that each light is giving off a level between 12 candles and a 25 watt modern bulb based on various reported luminance levels, without any direction from the lamp itself. I’ve also assumed that the level of reflection from walls and street would be zero (new brick only reflects 15% and given the level of coal smoke discolouration I doubt the level of reflection would be much more than zero). The yellow matches that of a modern dipped headlight at 10 metres, which is the median distance for identifying a pedestrian in black as a pedestrian, the lightest blue is below a full moon, lightest grey no colour vision. I agree with you on the invisibility issue, but if any killer was near the wall furthest away from the follower, they wouldn’t be highlighted in the same way as you’d have dark clothed individual against dark brick wall.

    If you want, I can send you a copy once I’ve tidied a few bits, to play with various combinations of lighting to try to match the descriptions given and make sense of the murder location as I believe the victims chose the street etc and Jack chose the spot within that street.

    Paul
    Hi, Paul could I have a copy too please

    Steve

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X