David G. Brown
RIP
Water was in beta testing when I came along, so I'm an old curmudgeon and right now I'm going to exercise the privileges of being a crusty old sailor.
Videos no matter how well crafted are simply somebody's (or a committee of somebodies') opinion about what happened. In no way should an animation or a reenactment on screen be confused with history any more than the set for Cameron's movie should be confused with the real ship. This may come as a shock, but real research takes work (sometimes years of work) digging for details (or even a single critical detail) in long-forgotten documents. Nobody becomes an expert by curling up in front of a TV screen or computer display with a bowl of popcorn.
Think about the background knowledge necessary to understand Titanic's breakup. Just a few of the areas a good researcher must be conversant in are: with steel ship construction, the properties of the materials (steel, iron, etc.) involved, vessel stability, permeability of compartments when flooding, the nature of buoyancy, the changing rate of ingress as a ship sinks, etc. Even the people with lots of letters after their names have not solved some of the biggest questions surrounding the breakup and sinking. And, while they do use computer simulations in their work, I'll guarantee they don't watch entertainments or computer games for knowledge.
Now, if one of you young whipper-snappers wold put my soap box away, I'd appreciate it.
-- David G. Brown
Curmudgeon-At-Large
Brilliant explantion David G. Brown, but in their defence, with Parks Stephenson, Bill Sauder and Ken Marshall to name a few working on the project, at least it's a informed opinion (and knowing Parks, properly already done the calculations!)
The producers have painstakingly researched the ship, getting every single little corner and crevice, and very, very rarely make guesses, and when they do guess, they're educated guesses that require comparison to many other ships of the time. They search through documents and testimony to find the precise design of the silverware, furnishings, and have made new discoveries
this will be the most accurate rendition of the Titanic and the sinking to date when it's released.
Which ignores many accounts and still has several mistakes.
I believe that the THG team gets too much of a bad rap. I too do not agree with everything they have done, but that is based on my knowledge and my research, just as their objective opinions are made on theirs.
At about 070:00 - 073:00 there seems to be a light low in the water - lower than the stars ? - off to port.
Could this have been intended to be Californian ? Or some other ship ? Or just a star low on the horizon ?
At about 070:00 - 073:00 there seems to be a light low in the water - lower than the stars ? - off to port.
Could this have been intended to be Californian ? Or some other ship ? Or just a star low on the horizon ?
In which video? I assume to mean this light? This is supposed to be the Californian:
View attachment 3380
I believe that the THG team gets too much of a bad rap. I too do not agree with everything they have done, but that is based on my knowledge and my research, just as their objective opinions are made on theirs. I try not to say that someone should dismiss their own interpretation of facts presented to them, over my interpretation of the same facts. Instead I make it a critical thinking exercise. I tell the kids (or young adults...) at the college I work at, that instead of trying to prove yourself right, try proving yourself wrong.
As we are all aware of there are many, many alternate information in all aspects of the Titanic. One survivor said this, that survivor said that. Part of that survivor's story fits, while another part doesn't, so how much credit is the over all story? Then the construction of the ship or practices of the time, blows both stories out of the water. These are scenarios that leads to the questions that we all must ask, and we all must try to make sense of. As this website has shown me, and by its very nature -is why it exists, is that even some of the most respected names within the Titanic community do not agree on a lot of things, though there is also A LOT of common ground.
Original research I believe is the safest bet. Take what the experts say, and then go off and do your own research. My shining example (I'm being sarcastic mind you) was around when I first joined this site with info on the watertight door indicator. I kept reading that there is no evidence that one ever existed, and I found evidence that one did, and though that evidence is GREATLY flawed, and my excitement blinded me- and thankfully this community helped me understand my blindness- and I made claims that I no longer hold (for the most part), I am still proud that those claims were not made by any other means then that of original research. Mind you I am much more conscience now at crossing my T's and dotting my I's. But that's what being part of this community does, it sets a standard.
I myself would love to say that I would make a computer generated Titanic, but I can't even get myself to put together the paper model of the ship given to me years ago. The fact that there is someone out there doing what I've always thought would be cool to do, is awesome. The fact that they are doing it and I'm not, only makes it theirs, with their interpretation of the events. No one would agree 100% with any version I came up with either, so as for me, I'm just proud to see what they have done, and the fact that, if anything, they are getting people interested and talking, which hopefully will lead to more original research.
Interesting discussion, particularly the comments by Sam about the problems encountered with simulating the ship's sinking.
It was not my point to say that there is not research behind many, or even all of the various simulations. The trouble is that no matter how well done a simulation is still only a simulation. It is not reality. At best, a simulation demonstrates in graphic terms ideas and concepts which are difficult to explain in words. For example, stress analysis simulations have taught a lot about what took inside the hull girder.
But, in the end a simulation is no more accurate that the data used to create it. Even the best is no more than an opinion presented in living color using images that are the product of human imaginaton.
My concern is that people, especially those who arrived after the millennium are losing the ability to do original research. They prefer watching dazzling videos on hand-held devices. I get that. It is exciting to watch Titanic sink in the palm of your hand. But, at the same time, the lax education they are receiving does not teach the difference between good research and 4-K video. The combined result is a short-circuiting of the reasoning process. This isn't a problem with something on the periphery of importance like Titanic. I just worry about what happens to a society that values pretty pictures over hard facts and reasoned debate.
-- David G. Brown
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?