picked up signals in an operation from donald kueck as he was calling and he knew he was in a particular area and by the last day as he was calling his daughter really in a panic, the man hunt begins to close in. donald kueck is heading to a complex somewhere in the mojave a few miles from where he lived and donald kueck is repeatedly calling his daughter by then as he sees this man and begin to close in, more and more shoppers are on his trail, there is a squeeze play under way and he knows there is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. homicide detective mark willis heads out to donald kueck's daughter's apartment in riverside to intercept these calls because he knows the game

is over and donald kueck by then is surrounded in a complex buyout ring of thousands of cops with choppers hovering and it is nearly sundown. .. at some point the phone has nearly completely melted down. donald, donald, press channel seven, talk on channeled seven,

press the red button and say, this is donald kueck, emergency. can anyone here me? i heard that part of the conversation and was really amazed because to me donald kueck goes ahead and says, this is donald kueck, emergency, can anyone here me. and to me that sums up the entire human condition. isn't that what we are all saying at any given time? after that remark the cellphone cuts out and it is sundown and donald kueck has not surrendered and gunshots are exchanged. he gets off some shots, and distinct from the gulf war that has been deployed during the manhunt begins to move and. donald kueck is being ordered to come out and he doesn't. he is firing at the tank. the s.w.a.t. team is in this tank. and at 1.1 of the guys inside -- they fired grenade into it this complex of sheds.

a c donald kueck reached up with a bare hand and grabbed the grenade and throw it away. that is our intense this pursuit kits. they start firing tear gas and because donald kueck is not coming out. really this unfolds like a tony montana thing. he is that coming out, even though he is surrounded literally by thousands of cops. there is a ring of law enforcement around this complex of sheds and choppers hovering and everything. he is not coming out. teargas is fired into the sheds and a fire breaks out. shots are continuing to be exchanged. donald kueck is seen dashing in and out. this goes on for hours. there is a full moon. this is very -- the gunfire died down and the fire has died down.

there's still no sign of donald kueck. cubs are wondering what happened have they been is chasing ago saw weak. they have not seen him for seven days. they really don't -- that are not even sure who -- if he is even in the area even anymore. so there is still low side. they began to search the rubble after the fire dies down with the full moon eliminating the scene. and they're walking across the embers of this firestorm. finally at the end this deal like bond jutting out through the ashes. the lectern, brush the ashes, percy ashes away, looked down and find the remains of donald kueck lying in the ashes crushing a rifle -- clutching a

rifle, and that's the end. >> roger ransom smores of domestic and foreign policy would have been different if this several -- civil war was won by the south. his book is "the confederate states of america," and he spoke with book tv while we were in palm springs, california. >> the premise of the book is exactly what the title suggests, what might have happened if the south won the civil war. it i think that is something worth worrying about because the truth of the matter is, the reason we were so much about the civil war is the south did not win, and the north did. and so i am trying to go back and reconstruct, from what we know about the way the war actually once and the reasons for it and say, now if we changed a few things to -- and he would have to change more than one, but a few things. what with the world be like.

>> the first things you look at. >> well, the first thing a look at is why did we fight this war in the first place? i will go into details, but to make a long story short, it is, we went to war over the issue of slavery. there are a lot of issues between north, south. as my daddy used to say, not about money. slavery may not have been the only reason, but it is way ahead of whatever is in second place. and that is important because the issue of slavery turns out to be something that is extremely difficult to resolve. so as the war progresses the mother are not very many exit paths, so the speak, to say let's stop fighting and see if we can settle this. they tried all of those and they did not work. so they must fight to the finish. what most people concentrate is one of two battles. gettysburg is the most famous battles and the one that we

could have won, but didn't. the other one that a lot of people move toward thinking may have been more pivotal jet was antietam. and that is the battle in which the british basically decided, since the south did not win, we won't go wind. of course, it is also the battle that prompted lincoln to issue the emancipation proclamation. that sets the tone of the rest of the war as being a war in slavery. the inability of lead to defeat the campaign was a turning point in the sense that, it meant that the south was now committed to have to keep on fighting, something they really were not as prepared to do simply because there were a small country, fewer men, not the capacity to fight that the north had. the south really would have preferred to end this quick -- quickly. antietam put any end to hope for that. the other turning point, once

you get past gettysburg would have been, lincoln would've had to lose the election. i think that one of the premises i have always held about the civil war is that a major theme that the north had going for it was a leader who was totally and completely committed to waging that war until the end, ending slavery, and winning the war. that meant the election for 64 would have had to go the other way. that would not have happened without something prior going different. two things i have differently are that the northern forces are not as successful, particularly at shiloh. this leads to a situation whereby the time you get to gettysburg if the south wins that battle, it is likely to turn the populace against lincoln and maybe they could have lankan lose the election and end the war.

>> so now was still the story in your book. lincoln lost the election. what's going on. >> i follow what is probably a pretty standard practice for people who speculate on the outcome of gettysburg. i have lee -- he wins because it is a couple of things right. the union army then has to retreat. we really does not have to do a lot more. he just has to stay in the north and make a menace of himself. the way elections go, these things build and opponents jump on it. they are defending themselves because lee is rampaging through pennsylvania. there is a york. next thing you know, he loses the election. the person coming in is going to be in a position to try and negotiate with the confederacy, and it is not that there necessarily want to negotiate with the confederacy. the problem is that, with a victory at gettysburg, the

french and the english, who have been watching ever since early in the war for a chance not necessarily to send troops, but to meddle with -- we are familiar with this today because you see people -- we will mediate the peace for you. the british offer to do that. lincoln would have turned them down. in his place as a new president, there is no way we will let you mediated peace. the piece is mediated. the treaty is signed, and the confederate states of america with jefferson davis as the president becomes a nation to the south of the united states of america which opens up a whole new world, a world that we can only imagine because it never existed. but think four minutes of the united states from baltimore all the way down through along the gulf coast to the end of texas,

that would be foreign territory, would not be part of the united states. in fact, the united states would have no real access to either the atlantic or the caribbean except for america from baltimore north as far as boston. so all the sudden the great coastal atlantic coast of the united states is no point where it can easily be blockaded. everything must be funneled. it does not mean the united states would collapse under its own weight but that the united states would no longer have anywhere near the presence and the western hemisphere in terms of dealing with british or french intervention. but in 1865 the french had troops. technically it was in mexico who. my theory is that how the self on the civil war the french were arrested in mexico. the british would have expanded

their influence throughout the caribbean. what became for the last half of the 19th and then to the 20th-century, the caribbean dollar dominated by the big north american state would not be there. it would be is south in the north, and the south would be allied to the british or to the french which would change the geopolitics. now i think you would also change the politics within the united states of america. losing wars was not -- does not come easy to any populace. and in the case of the civil war going the wrong way and having the south wind, republicans would be cursed because they were the ones that started the war in the eyes of the public and then lost it. the fact that there were the ones to surrender to the enemy. both parties could use that against the other. my theory is probably would get

a huge realignment, probably if not what became the populace, but some third-party perry to get debt situation of much more instability and much less. one has to remember that the x and f after the civil war was the republican dominated led to the united states become the great industrial nation of the 20th-century. and not sure would have, had the south won that war. and assault certainly would not have. >> what happens to the institution of slavery in the confederate states of america? >> see ticket ride of my mouth. as far as the slaves are concerned, the only in a baldness, there would have become free not because they're confederates wanted to free them, not because of abolitionists in the north. there would have become free because the cotton market was going to collapse in the 1870's,

whatever the outcome of the civil war. that the lapse was born to cause the price of slaves to change dramatically. slavery in the united states was an economic institution. even before the civil war, half the volume -- volume of capital invested in the south was in the form of slaves, huge. think of the market collapse recently in the 21st century. in the 19th century a collapse of the common market and the collapse of slave prices will have a similar sort of effect. we will be a financial disaster. now, the way to offset that disaster, prices are falling and people expected to keep happening for a while is that the slaveholders would turn to the government for help. that is, after all, the american way. they would say, by our slaves.

immense benton, get us out from under this because it would become a dead because they had paid a lot for the slaves and could not repay it. go out from under the debt and we will be forever grateful. , probably have to speed things up a little to soothe my tail, but i have that happening in the 1880's. mr. rdh and 80's to be the 1890's. i have to quickly remind people, this is in the same as saying the united states would have emancipated slaves in . the southerners could do that because they controlled the outcome. what you have is something pepper much different from south africa. blacks would beef not free. it would just not the slaves anymore. you wipe out the economic burden of slaves being capital and replace it with a racial system of segregation much stronger than what we actually saw. what we saw was enough to give

you a clue of what would happen if seveners have their hands free to do anything. one huge loser in a southern victory would have been the african-americans. because even if they were free from slaves there would not be able to go north. remember that in fact the way many african americans cut out from under the heel of segregation of the legacy of slavery was they went north. i don't think the united states would welcome it if it had been in the context of a war that they lost to the south. >> why not? >> the same reason we don't really welcome mexicans, black americans. i think there are very strong racial aspects here. i have always told my students, one of the things that made the expansion of slavery so disagreeable to northerners is they really did not want blacks coming into their territories. it was simple. you don't want blacks in your neighborhood.

slavery and park was synonymous. i mean, there were small numbers , a very small number of free blacks that for the most part, a black person was a slave therefore if you move your slaves and their, you move by people and then. i always argue that this was the valley in the form of expansion of slavery. it could be tolerated and partly because north americans are not all that free from racism themselves. they could tolerate slavery if it was in the south, run by southerners, and never touched our chores, so the speech, but there would not tolerate it -- tolerate it if they saw it in their neighborhood, so to speak. >> so now we're into the 20th century. with the united states and the confederate states of america be

like? >> in my book i . out that one of the problems, you know that i keep referring back to what actually happened. you can only do that up to a point. the further along the go it's like climbing a tree and pretty sure your way out of the in the branches. you have too many branches and roots and can no longer maintain a coherent story. i and my book. i'm perfectly willing to concede that this is a convenient way to close up and in the book. it is harder and starting it. i ended by saying, the one thing that would not have changed as the world was still be caught up in the grips of the first world war. great powers, france, germany, england, still would have played out their games and fought the world war. i say, one of the differences about this group or is that the united states would have been not in it. the confederacy would be tied closely to england and france,

and america would only have one place left. that would be germany. oh, no. 20th-century americans. it would never join up with the germans. in 1900 the germans were the second largest influence in the united states behind the irish. so to this day you can see it in the midwest. milwaukee, st. louis. large german communities. and this was a factor in not giving in to world war one to some extent. my theory is the united states will have comments of the war on the side of germany and the confederacy would have been on this side of the allies and the first world war would have been right here at home. that change is just a couple of things. this some battles and the war. you try to -- i had a recipe.

i believe it is two parts reality and one part imagination you intersperse them were and enjoy it a good meal. the factual part is very important. >> was the question historian's asked often? >> they don't ask it openly. there is -- the way i put it, every historian secretly asks what if when he is writing his history. or at least if your dealing with the historians who are writing about great events and so forth. they choose their events partly because the think they are important. why? because if they did not happen, the world would be different. if you are arguing that the world has changed, then you must be arguing that it would have been different if it did not happen. so it's very much there and

that's why i came out of the closet, so to speak. i think that's what my book on the confederate states of america was. coming of the closet and saying this is the way i think it should be taught. in terms of people understanding what but have happened if the war came out differently. >> for more information on it book tv recent visit to palm springs, california, and our local content visits, go to c-span.org / local content. >> what are you reading this summer? book tv wants to know. >> the first one i read is called in animals. my daughter read it. the study's major. very interested in the whole food movement and fighting against factory food. i eat meat, chicken, seafood.

i came away from this book knowing bed for a compelling writer and referred to that one. the rest of my works, attributed to my son, the biography called every love story is a good story. -- ghost story. my son is a big fan of wallace. wallace was regarded by many to be one of the most interesting and creative writers of his era. he tragically killed himself a few years ago. just very interesting what happened in his life. a biography. so that's my biography for the summer. next is a book by jonathan row

called our common loss. passed away two years ago without having finished his book. so friends came together and pull together his outlays all about the comments which is basically anything that belongs to humanity. the air, the water, public spaces, the internet, and one of his drives was to protect the comments and make sure that everything does not get taken over by private enterprises. that is very much on my list. i heard it's very interesting. last is fiction, the new book called in imagine the echo. this is my little way of going to afghanistan without getting on a plane. a family story.

into it generational family. and i think he's a wonderful writer. bin but i just enjoyed every minute of it. thank you. >> let us know what you're reading this summer. tweet us. @booktv. posted on our facebook page, or send us an e-mail. >> recently book tv attended a party for their release of the cinematographer john guntzelman book "the civil war in color", a photographic re-enactment of the war between the states. watch as he speaks to guess of the party and makes remarks. this is about an hour. >> good to see you again.

>> a very good. >> dr. sue hall, john guntzelman, the author. >> pleasure. thank you for being here. >> abcaeight. >> a few bucks if you would sign. >> please. like to sign a but. >> certainly. absolutely. actually, i will -- i prefer to use a sharp be because my handwriting is atrocious. this takes away the edge. >> taylor is my name. >> okay. >> i am just a history buff.

>> thank you so much. enjoy the book. [inaudible conversations] >> john, this is david paul. he is one of the photographers. >> good to me you. to meet you. >> thank you. >> right up your alley. >> that was a long talk. >> an interesting time. is a very different. [inaudible conversations] >> the photograph, two and a half to three years. and so. [inaudible conversations] >> well, to some extent. it is just more your view.

maybe it's time. just something you cannot rush. you can address this. it did spend a lot of time. sort of a different time. i started on december 1. progressed to the more quantitative one. i get a little bit caught up. >> i got through some of it. [inaudible conversations] >> something that basically could not have been done ten years ago. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> okay. well, and a sense there was. no, absolutely. getting more into it, and i will

later this evening. i had to generate one on a picture from, some very familiar . that kind of stuff, sometimes it's generated off of a blue screen or a green screen. this case i never did that. so i had to generate in some cases so poultry's. otherwise every branch, every leaf. [inaudible conversations] >> there had to be technical ways to get around that. at the same time, it had to be something that did not modify the photographs in any way because these are historical photographs. you cannot really -- there's just no way to do that. so the issue of doing it in the

most expedient way but also the highest quality way that would honor. [inaudible conversations] >> yap. >> of course it did. the estimate was. when you looked at it. working on something. then you get it partially done. you stand back and look at it. it's pretty cool. you keep moving, and you get so involved in the minutia of it. you stand back and look at it. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> well, yes. director of photography. so high paid the spirit -- experience in doing a lot of work, blue screen, green screen, stuff like that, but that, again, that is an adjoint bouncing around in my head, something that was not really important that when i got into certain pictures that were

fairly complex, finding ways to generate was the only way i could deal with the complexity of the issue. again, think of a tree against a blue sky. well, he ceded trees and branches. i had to figure out a way. so then i put it back together. so that's the way the thing went. it was pretty involved. >> june and carol. and if you put -- yes. and party leader. lee. the date. but near camp commander. >> all right. >> there you go.

[inaudible conversations] >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> enjoy the book. >> enjoy. >> congressman dan mcrae. [inaudible conversations] >> she gave me a copy. i told her i was interested in history. particularly civil war history. not really -- >> i told him. >> exactly. >> really enjoyed that. >> book writing. >> they said. [inaudible conversations] >> in my district. >> that's wonderful. thank you so much. we will get back in there.

>> yes. >> so, good. you do a lot of -- >> no, this is the first cinematography. i've had an interest and civil war in history. [inaudible conversations] the centennial for obvious reasons. >> the lincoln movie coming out. >> we decided to do it. >> the movie doesn't make historical. >> no. the pictures from disney and warner brothers. certainly no historical pictures. >> yes. >> those are the big ones. >> you never know.

>> you never know. [inaudible conversations] >> if i do. [inaudible conversations] never know where i'm going to be it changes. >> well, no. something. but i usually don't. [inaudible conversations] >> i will certainly look you up if i am ever. >> any of the sesquicentennial? >> i was actually -- >> there is a huge amount that you had one at gettysburg this

summer. i don't know of second be there or not. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> and my bookstore. they are both books from the same. [inaudible conversations] >> it's that much. [inaudible conversations] >> really? >> oh, yeah. that area. harriet tubman.

>> we have all lot of that. [inaudible conversations] >> make it more alive. >> my pleasure. thank you. >> we have a great photographer in the personage of john guntzelman. he and i have worked together for many years, 20 years. there are other great photographers. stated policy your. so i think you will enjoy exactly what john has done. but this started back in in 2007. back in about 2009 john and i,

who we worked together for a long time. he said i am working on this book on the civil war. i said, well, i'm on this council for george washington university. i happen to know a woman named kathy green who is a book agent. and lo and behold, we put them together. they met for the first time tonight. i find it unusual. but i remembered riding with cathy. i drove her to a union station to go back to new york. she said, paul -- this was in 2009. i'm getting five bucks a day through the internet and 40 books mail to me from authors. and she said, i'm just getting so many books. and to be honest with you, i almost don't bother picking up the written books that arrive in the mail. i have so many. they just come over the

internet. is to so much easier. i thought the chance of getting a book published was remote, but john had a very unusual book. we have an announcement. cathy green can tell you how it is doing. is the civil war in color is the name of the book. but you just shout out what we learned yesterday. >> about the amazon. >> the book is been doing really well. our amazon. we look at it every single day. it was number nine yesterday. [applause] >> we appreciate you coming tonight. all tell you a little bit about what you're going to see. first of all, these are wonderful photographs of the civil war by the great photographers, matthew brady, timothy sullivan and others that

john will reference. he obtained them from the library of congress. i will let him describe the process. i hope you appreciate kind of the beauty of what is occurring at the civil war in color. that is, you have this world-class, you know, photographers of the civil war who went out there and risked their lives and took these pictures. they had to freeze for like 20 seconds or 15 seconds, otherwise they blur. 150 years later comes john guntzelman. now, having stood next to him for 20 years and 90-degree temperature and freezing cold and driving rain and pulling out and looking at what is the best shot, i know that he has a just spectacular i. he sees color. he sees light, maybe as most photographers to.

he sees images like you and i don't. it is almost as if he has evolved into another species beyond us and views photographs. and so it is altogether fitting that he came up with the eddy of the changing the black-and-white photos into color. so, i think a little joy in creating this book publishing hopefully bonanza together. i would like to introduce john guntzelman, the civil war -- "the civil war in color." [applause] >> first of all, i'm going to thank all of you for being here this evening. i am absolutely thrilled with this event. i am so happy that you guys are here to spend a little bit of your evening to learn a little

bit more about this book. i want to extend a warm welcome to all you guys for being an. after the introduction that paul gave, i should probably just pack up and leave. i can't quite rise to the occasion. yes, indeed. paul has been a friend for 20 years. i worked with them on many, many occasions. it has always been a pleasant experience. paul is one of the most enthusiastic people i have ever met. he has the enthusiasm of a child . and i mean that and the best possible sense. he brings everything to the project. and this small project this evening, he brought everything, all of you people, and and the so happy for it. a little more back story to them just this evening, though, which paul mentioned.

three years ago i had almost completed the book and was then trying to get the book published i had no agent. so i contacted paul and said, by any chance to you know anyone who could maybe help me with this project? and luckily enough, he knew cathy green who, kathy subsequently became my agent, subsequently sold the book the storm publishing. it is an amazing world we live in now in that you can have our relationship long distance, by telephone, e-mail. we have been mailed hundreds of times, a thousand times. and this evening was the first time we laid eyes on each other, which is just a little bit bizarre, but pleasant nevertheless.

the job at sterling was just a perfect fit. the senior editor at sterling, harvard burger, and i in concert with a design company that worked with sterling, came out with the layout of this fabulous, fabulous book. and a sizable portion of their input is responsible for the overall look of this book. it is just fabulous. and to fit with my book in sterling, is so perfect of the mash. i cannot even imagine the project ever having been done or drafted anywhere else. they just did a terrific job. let me tell you a little bit of the background on this book, the genesis, if you will, where it came from.

my wife and i, as paul said, and late 2007, my wife and i were vacationing on maui. and at that time she was reading a book about the civil war, a fascinating book, blood, tears, and lori by the author james griffin who also is herm ohio. actually, the first book -- first title was blood, tears, and glory and how ohio won the civil war. my wife and i were talking about that looking at the photographs in the book. and at that time we knew that these sesquicentennial was not too far advanced. we talked a little bit about photos. i say, gee, wouldn't it be great to see a book of color and civil war photographs. be careful what you wish for.

well, when we return from holiday, i did a little bit of research on the availability of black-and-white photographs. i found numerous sites. the gold standard of sites is library of congress. they have such a collection of the best work of timothy o'sullivan brady, alexander gardner, and others. i mean, just phenomenal. in addition to that they have scanned this material at infinitely, incredibly high resolution. these scans are available on-line. you don't have to come to d.c. to look at these things. to then have photographic prints made and taken away. you can download these things on to your own computer. even more importantly, there are

no rights incumbrances. this is all public domain. once i found that out, it seemed like this really has to be a great idea. and as i researched i found that there have never been a book of colorized civil war photographs ever. it is a unique job. unique is not a word -- there is no such thing as slightly unique and a more unique. this book is. at least so far. when we -- when i saw this stuff i started downloading what i considered to be the best images and by best, it was a twofold approach. they had to be high-quality photographically. but even more so, they had to have great human interest.

that was primarily found in faces, people of the era, people of the era really are not much different than the people now. they lived in different times and circumstances. the people are pretty much people. and once i decided on that to my broken down into eight different chapters for the book. and i segregated the down of material into this section has chapters and cetera colorizing them. i started with the simpler ones first. and by simpler, that would be portraits. so the first one i did was a portrait in the book of robert e. lee. the portraits were simpler because it is a man to the waist usually. i color, hair color of, bit of buttons on the uniform. and that is pretty much it.

as opposed to large battlefront -- battle field shots that have hundreds of people in trees, wagons, horses, what have you. i started with simple ones and gone to more complex ones as my facility colorizing and improved . the background of all of this goes back to the quality of the imagery stand at library of congress. some of these photographs were scanned at the 4,000 dpi, dots per inch, at that kind of resolution i can move in and in and end and then and colorize the slightest little detail in the images without the edge falling apart. most of these photographs, many,

most probably, many people don't realize that photos of that era were quite often shot as stereo few cards, a left and right eye image on the same negative. the camera obviously had to lenses. these were then printed on to our viewing prince. the cards then to be -- you can look through and see the image and stereo. very similar to -- it probably remember that you master thing as a kid. these were very common the spacing of the two lenses are wider apart than the space your heart to last two highs. stronger than you would see in person.

the three-dimensional aspect is really remarkably good. so it may be new, but what is new resolve again. once i down loaded these as black and white images, the first thing i did was to clean them off. they had dust, scratches. in some cases since these were all photographed in glass plates and in some cases the plates had actually cracked. so i had to digitally bring the images back and put these cracks back together in three or four instances where it was an important issue to sigell picture rather than pieces of it

. i cleaned it these things up again with dust and scratch removal, but in no way did i want to do anything to alter these things. these are iconic, historic photographs. no one can mess with them or change them. you can colorize them and do a good job of it, but you have not the right to do anything to alter these photographs. it was absolutely as far as doing anything, altering the pictures are doing anything along those lines. once i had cleaned an image of i then turned it into an orgy defile. let's assume the original file was 15 megs as a black-and-white photograph. it then suddenly became a 45 make file. some of the files are much bigger. some were over 100 per image. these are huge files that i was

dealing with. the primary tool i used to do this was adobe, which is a beautiful tool. basically what it does is puts a color overlay over the original black-and-white photograph, but it does not alter the black-and-white contrast. a black-and-white range in contrast. this is over the top. the color of the shares will be lighter or darker in the folds of material. it does not modify the black-and-white image behind it, underneath it. the black-and-white photos were colorized from the inception. various devices were used, crayons, pastels dry ink. usually the best ones done back

then were the ones that were the most transparent, which then allows you to see more of the black-and-white image behind it. with the advent of the quality of father shove you, of course, or allowed to do that with no restrictions. it is really a phenomenal program. again, going back to the detailed being so good, i could just move van. they have made a group of canons on a field a half a mile of way and then go back to the entire photograph. you would see everything. so my next job was to try and do some research on appropriate colors. there are a lot of sources on the internet and in museums. uniforms, for instance, still exist.

of course, they fade over 150 years. so i did a lot of research as to what was appropriate, what was appropriate for women's clothing of that era, what color, bright, more muted? what was appropriate? all kinds of things. and i was able to find those through hundreds of checks on the internet, search is on the internet. and finally my periodical, affirmation just built and built and built. the more i knew how to proceed. the purpose of this book -- it is not a historical book. the photographs are historic, but i am not an historian. the purpose of this book was to show people a pretty good idea what it was like to live back then 150 years ago.

the black-and-white photos never do that. the color photos move to a point where it actually -- were you actually can see. it is just a whole different level of looking at these images . and you see more detail than you otherwise would probably not have seen in black and white. and number of people have talked to me and said, i am seeing detail in there that i never would have noticed as black-and-white. so this really -- again, the purpose is for people to make that connection to 150 years ago which is not -- this was to lifetimes ago. 150 years ago is not that long ago, and yet when you view it through the filter of gray scale photographs it certainly can look that way, what it is not. the skies are blue, trees are

green. it is very similar to what we see now. and also, and looking at these photographs uc little details. i am not necessarily talking about uniforms. i'm talking about other people. the women. there is one photograph of a number of slaves picking -- collecting cotton. and if you look at the close. the dimension of it, one of the ladies, one of the black levees has a gold earring on her ear. i didn't put that there. i colored it cold, but it was there on the photograph. it is just -- it is sort of like looking at the gateway to history that allows you to see more. collar allows you to see more than you ever would have noticed in black-and-white. and again, it is intended to be

basically like a coffee table book, something that one does not have to be an historian to appreciate. in fact, you can look at this and never read a word of text, merely photographs. i think you can walk away from this book seeing something of interest. so absolutely. absolutely. a closer view of the same. it is just astounding. i mean, this is an era that is so similar to nowadays, i am just amazed. there greece bonds for the book has been quite good, as cathy mentioned. and just so thrilled that people have been able to connect to what i hope to they would get from the book. again, it is not a history book, but it isay to go back in

time and see that time and a more realistic way and maybe we can then learn from that regard to get into a great deal of detail. but it is a very slow going process. it took me the better part of three years, two and a half years, anyway, once returned from the holiday, it took me to when a half years to colorize these pictures. originally my concept was 150 pictures, 150 pictures for the sesquicentennial. perfect. it turns out books of this type usually prefer are around 200. so the final end result of this is a little bit more than 200 photographs. but there it is. and the colorizing was very slow going.

once i finished that, then the whole thing of fracking text for the book came about. that was another part of a year to do it. altogether this is about a three and a half-for your project. i'm not sure if i have another one of these in me. again, i have to go back to the library of congress. without the quality of those stands i could have gotten any number of civil war photographs downloaded from many other places, and it would not have been able to appear like this. they just did not have the resolution. that kind of feeling in the library of congress is such that there was no pixel as asian and it. i downloaded -- you can download these things before five different levels of resolution.

what i on four was always the highest wind impressed files. these, of course, with a huge files. once they start moving you never see any kind of pixel resolution. the image so voice starts falling apart when the grain structure of the film becomes evident, and that is absolutely astounding. so, other than that, it was a very slow going process. i found it an exciting process. the idea -- someone asked me the floor, was it fun? yes. a great amount of fun. what was even more fun was when i was see a picture partially completed, i get so involved in the minutia of doing buttons, would say come on a uniform and after an hour i back away from the computer, roll the chair back from a desktop a little bit . well, that looks pretty good. 10 percent down.

now 90 more% to go. [laughter] >> perseverance has always been one of my things. so i did persevere. and it is very satisfying to me to have an idea like this that comes to fruition and is eight successful idea. but i have had so much help with so many people. mr. wilson, ms. green, the people at sterling. they have just been so wonderful. they saw this thing. they immediately got it. they get it before the public. again, the job that they did on printing this, on the large format, the quality of the printing is just astounding. i'm not sure i have a whole lot more to say about the book, but i would be welcome to open up for questions.

>> let me pose undue the first question. this is a picture of abraham lincoln. i think his skin tone is unusual. .. so i did an internet search on lincoln's complexion. sounds like an odd search but i've found a number of hits to

it. he was described as being very dark, and very ready complexion. his skin was described as like leather. that gave me the suggestions that maybe this thing is more correct than we might have ever known. but again that goes back to what is inherent in this photograph. nothing was changed in these photographs. i think everyone but the people i should have thanked most, the original photographers who took these things. the i for doing these things than coming in on a wagon to a battlefield, your dark room is in the wagon bouncing around, you have to find a source of water, the photographer sets up the camera for the photograph, the assistant pull out a glass

plate, put the collodion mixture which is like a blue and holds the silver nitrate solution making it sensitive to light. the place has to be slid into a carrier, taken back to the camera, slid into it, photographic those, slid back in to the tenth or wagon as the case may be and photographed on the spot. it is of which play. this has to happen in an unreasonable time before the plate dries out because then it is no good. all labor-intensive thing and i assume that the newness of the medium at the time was enough to spur is these people on to incredible odds to pull these photographs off and they did such an incredible job.

paul mentioned you had to stand still for a while. if you look at some of these photographs i make mention of that in an early section of the book, some of these photographs, a hand is blurred or a head is blurred or sometimes the whole body, they moved during the interval of exposure and even in bright sunlight that interval of exposure could have been two or three seconds, sometimes less, sometimes more. all those things are, pounded to make a photograph an event that was so difficult to pull off than those photos, there would be no book. that is the true artistry behind this book, the fabulous, fabulous photos. >> i have seen many of these images, a civil war buff would. i have seen many of these images, any civil war buff

would, always in black and white with is an abstraction and i want to thank you for bringing color to the pictures which we can relate to with another level of the motion. [applause] >> i think you so much and you most eloquently said what i hope this book achieved and apparently it has. >> i have a question. i was impressed with this image on page 19, those dresses. i am a photo shop teacher and this looks really hard to me and i wonder if you have tips and tricks. >> i could not show you if i told you. actually it is not as difficult as it looks. if you go back to what i said

about retaining the the black-and-white contrast and brightness range, if you take the green of the photograph away, the white dots are still going to be there. >> i was looking at these -- >> that is inherent in the photograph. i did none of that. that is there in the original photograph and to some extent that is a great photographs. people dressed up in their finery for the event having a photograph taken and the detail of that, all the ladies's dresses that is what they were like. who would have thought? >> these are, watches. >> that is a way of putting it. i did not have to -- in many other cases, i had a case of colorizing every little bit but in a case like that, that is

inherent in the black-and-white value of the photograph and that is a color watcher. back to what i said before, 150 years ago when images were hand colored, the more transparent of a watch put over the top of that the more effective in was. to get a little more complicated there are many other programs where you will see trees against sky. you can see the sky through the trees. i did not get in and colorize every leaf, every other four. based upon my motion picture background i was able to arrive at what are called mattes, in search and holds back and in search color into, and allows you to take stuff -- not to get

into something and in a case of the tree against the sky, one side figured out a way to generate mats which was pretty difficult i then could colorize the tree, the green, colorize the sky blue, in effect put those elements back together. we still have to get involved in coloring the would which is another in issue. if it were not a labor of love, it probably never would have happened because again, there is no simple way to do this, at least not to that level that you see. in the book. >> when it comes to your color palette and choice of color, when i take pictures today flash can watch out a picture, they didn't have control flashes, it

was just a chemical and you got what you got. when it came down to the person of color, the lady with the earring, how did you determine it was gold versus silver versus another? >> i didn't. in some cases like that it is the best guess. there is no way in the world's short of a time machine you will ever go back -- >> if you looking at the color, black and white photos of various colors and how the caller might show up in a black and white. >> not necessarily. >> mainly a personal choice. >> to some extent it was. i had read and searched, comparing this stuff to emotions is not a good thing to do. father are no in nelson's now. it is all digital. if you compare it to modern

emotions the quality of tee grain, modern emotions being in black and white negatives doesn't compare at all with how stuff was grabbed 150 years ago. in many cases they were dramatic. so the great value is not 100% representative to the color value. the difference being and dramatic will represent gray at the same brightness value as color would. it is not -- it is a little more sensitive to the red so any time read would appear a little darker. >> one more thing, how wonderful these photographs are the. there was no way to mass produce photographs in those days. >> what happened with these pictures, not knowing they would

never make a dime because everything that showed up in a newspaper was an adjunct. there was no way of transferring a negative glass plate or positive print in to a printing place. the technology was not there. brady diet of hopper because he thought he could sell these things to the government after the war. the war was so painful to most people they didn't want anything to do with it. so he died a pauper and without the library of congress saving these things we probably would not even still have them. but yes, there was no way of doing that. the glass plate items had no way of enlarging it. they didn't take a negative this size and blow up to this size,

they had to have a plate that size which is why when you look at some of the photos of cameras of that era you will see a disparity of sizes, some are like this, some like this. once the negative existed it could be a positive image of that could be made, the glue if you will, that held the light sensitive material to the paper and there was no way of doing anything except the size, what you see is what you get and it again goes back to why so many of these were shot as stereo view cards because they were very popular. another image, another photo, very popular than, i am not

french but they were visitors cards about the size of a baseball card and these were mailed to family and friends, traded like baseball cards and those were made with cameras outfitted with four or six or eight lenses so that the negative made from that camera could then replicate six, eight, four, whatever. it was rather archaic but what i found amazing was while it was archaic the overall technical quality of the images was remarkably good. these were all big negatives, not the size for example of mm but negative this size, the equivalent of 8 x 10 view

camera, for something made in the back of a wagon 150 years ago the quality of these things is astounding. >> have you seen the 0 regional? did you see them? just the image is? >> absolutely not. to do that, that was not where i wanted to approach this from. to do that you could have spent five years going for a library of congress to look at these. on a motion picture project once i did go to the library of congress to look at photographs of the 1906 earthquake and i remember the event well for one reason because my car was towed. rolled out cards of these prints

from 1906 and they were huge. many of these were 0 original first-generation prints from the negatives. i saw no reason to do that because the standing is so good and the library of congress has done this so often that their approach to it is they want to show you as much as they possibly can from contrast range but other than that they don't want to do anything. >> one other question. photoshop did not predict for you a color? >> absolutely not. >> it is not like some of the other colorization software. >> no. this was -- note, photoshop does