Aerial Photography

Which of you writing a history dealing with events of the past sixty years would ignore an unimpeachable source that could add new dimensions and perspec­tives to that history? This is precisely what many historians have done and are doing when they fail to recognize and utilize aerial photography in their en­deavors. Aerial photography as a his­torical source is a priceless record of which few historians are aware; fewer still know how to interpret; and even fewer know the location of repositories or their availability for research.

Aerial photography can play three important roles in historical research. It can be either a confirmatory or denial source of information; it can provide keys to further research; and it can provide information not available from other sources. The historian can also get, literally, a broader overview of the area(s) of concern.

Historians should not be intimidated by aerial photographs. They can be in­terpreted and analyzed with the same methodical precision afforded by other sources. A one-semester undergraduate photo interpretation course, teaching the fundamentals, is usually sufficient for basic aerial photo research and in­terpretation purposes. Historians will readily admit that information derived from aerial photography, or the pho­tography itself, has influenced and is influencing decisions relating to critical national and international issues.

Consequently, it is inconceivable that not a single college or university in the United States teaches photo interpreta­tion techniques as part of the history curriculum. Those of us who have inter­preted aerial photography over the years are amazed as to the volume of detailed photo-derived information that could be added to existing historical records. I am appalled, for example, that some of the better histories of World War II and the postwar period have not used aerial photography as a source, although aerial reconnaissance played a vital role in the planning and execution of all major military opera­tions. Headquarters and field com­manders insisted that aerial reconnais­sance be conducted before, during, and after the campaigns. Crucial decisions were based on the results of the interpretation of that imagery.

Recently, I told a famous historian that I could have added new dimensions and perceptions to one of her recent books. She immediately demanded to know my source. When I told her about the availability of aerial photography taken during the campaign of which she had written so brilliantly, she seemed surprised. Most historians are surprised to learn that pertinent photography is still in existence. Since historians either don’t know about aerial photography or don’t know how to interpret it, it is not surprising that their students, likewise, have not used it.

Aerial photography as a historical source is a priceless record of which few historians are aware.

Aerial photography has become an invaluable tool for the scientists, engi­neers, planners, environmentalists, car­tographers, etc., engaged in activities ranging from archeology to zoology. Each day thousands of aerial photos are acquired for a variety of purposes by private organizations and by local, state, and federal agencies. The diverse aerial platforms range from low-flying heli­copters and light aircraft to the U-2 and SR-71, the reconnaissance resources of the military services, the overhead re­connaissance systems, the NASA sensor­-laden satellites and shuttles, and the meteorological satellites photographing the hemispheres from an incredible 22,300 miles in space.

Each aerial platform was designed to achieve specific objectives, but all are engaged in a common generic activity­—the creation of a historical record. Each photographic exposure creates an irre­placeable record of an activity or condi­tion at a specific moment in time, and each photograph establishes a baseline that is of critical importance in recogniz­ing the inevitable changes that will occur in the future.

The next logical question is: “How large is this record and where is it stored?” The National Cartographic In­formation Center has catalogued over 350 organizations holding aerial pho­tography but readily admits that there are probably hundreds more. The larg­est holder, the National Archives, has over 600,000 cans of aerial photography in their records center. The film was acquired by the military services, federal agencies, and contractor missions and covers the period from World War I to the Vietnam conflict.

This treasure trove of history has re­cently been augmented by the addition of all the captured aerial photography acquired by the Luftwaffe during World War IL The archives of the Depart­ments of Agriculture and Interior con­tain more than 25 million prints of the United States. The EROS Data Center at Sioux Falls,  South Dakota, stores more than a million photographic expo­sures taken from assorted space plat­forms. In the archives of a private map­ping and charting organization in the Carolinas, typical of the many private organizations, are several hundred cans of aerial photography, a record of the happenings of that area for the past 20 years.

The primary purpose of aerial pho­tography for many years was military reconnaissance. Commencing in World War I, the airplane and the aerial photo became the “eyes of the army” and discovered enemy positions that were later bombarded by artillery and bomb­er aircraft. In the period between World War I and World War II, mapping and charting organizations used aerial pho­tos for the creation of a wide variety of maps and charts. Others, such as forest­ers, saw that aerial photography could be used in assessing timber yields or surveying diseased areas. Geologists, searching for oil and minerals in inac­cessible areas, began using aerial pho­tography to save time and money. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, hundreds of aerial surveys were utilized in the rout­ing and construction of transcontinental highways. Aerial photos were also in­strumental in site selection of the many dams and hydroelectric projects under­taken during the New Deal period. Ag­ricultural crop control and erosion pro­jects also made extensive use of aerial photography.

Prior to World War II, little was known about the European, Asian, and African landmasses on which the war was about to be fought. Aerial photog­raphy not only provided vital geograph­ic knowledge, but also the basis for the production of maps and charts needed to prosecute the war. In addition to photographing the battlefronts, a num­ber of aerial surveys were made of the vast and worldwide logistical networks extending from Latin America to the Arctic Ocean and from the Himalayas to the Pacific Islands. For most of these areas, it was the first time they had been photographed from the air.

At the end of the war, thousands of cans of photography were destroyed because it was believed that the photog­raphy was no longer of any practical use. Fortunately, thousands of other cans of aerial photography did find their way to Washington, DC reposi­tories.

In the early 1950s, the United States became concerned about the lack of hard data on Soviet installations. The Central Intelligence Agency was charged with developing an aircraft spe­cifically designed for reconnaissance purposes. The resultant U-2 became the far-seeing eye of the intelligence com­munity and  blanketed the Soviet Union. The photography, interpreted by CIA analysts, quickly dispelled as myths the so-called “bomber gap,” “missile gap,” and “megatonnage gap” with respect to Soviet strategic warfare capabilities. In October 1962, it was a U-2 mission that discovered Soviet deployment of medi­um and intermediate range ballistic mis­siles in Cuba. The numerous and varied satellite imagery sensing systems result­ed in a virtual explosion in the wealth of information collected worldwide.

Unfortunately, over the years, the lack of awareness that the aerial photo constituted a valuable historical record has resulted in thousands of cans being indiscriminately destroyed. To my knowledge, historians were not consult­ed nor did they express any interest in becoming involved in determining what photography was to be retained and what was to be destroyed.

Aerial photography is acquired for a variety of purposes and once a specific project is complete, the film’s continued usefulness is deemed minimal, and there is strong pressure to destroy it.

Criteria for the destruction of film vary widely, depending upon the con­tinuing needs of the user organization. For some, it is the frequency of use rather than the intrinsic historical value of the film. The policy of many map­ping and charting organizations, for ex­ample, is to retain only “the latest and the best” film, which supports the indis­criminate destruction of large quantities of older film and, thereby, the loss of historical records of untold value. The mapping and charting organizations that dominated aerial photographic col­lection and exploitation activity in the late 1940s and early 1950s preserved primarily only clear and cloud free pho­tography with no consideration of its substantive content.

A variety of means, some of them extremely rudimentary, are used to manage the use of film—ranging from manual date stamping of a can of pho­tography each time it is used to elabo­rate computerized data control meth­ods. In more than forty years in aerial photo interpretation activities, I’ve been appalled at the unsystematic methods used to determine whether a can of film is to be kept or destroyed. The crudest is the “dust control” method of determin­ing frequency of film use by the accu­mulation of dust on the tops of the cans; those with the most dust are marked for destruction. If a large quantity of repeti­tive aerial photography exists over a specific area, the percentage of film to be retained is often established arbi­trarily. This type of selectivity seriously impairs the historicity of the materials being retained.

. . . the lack of awareness that the aerial photo constituted a valuable historical record has resulted in thousands of cans being indiscriminately destroyed.

There are three additional incentives for destroying old films. Older film comprises a chemically unstable and highly flammable nitrate base and re­quires temperature-controlled storage. The cost of copying it onto safety based film also mitigates in favor of its de­struction. Some organizations have sim­ply destroyed all their holdings of ni­trate-based film. The market value of recoverable silver from either nitrate-based or safety-based film is also a prof­itable incentive toward destruction of these valuable records.

It is difficult to make a cogent argu­ment for the continued retention and storage of anything that is not being used. The aerial photography of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp that Robert Poirier and I dis­covered, analyzed, and published had remained on the shelf for thirty-three years without ever being used. The film had never been exploited simply be­cause Holocaust historians did not re­gard aerial photography as a viable source of information. Yet, these photos have been described by Israeli experts as among “the largest caches of infor­mation ever found on Auschwitz” and are now on display at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem and at  the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum in Poland.

The value of aerial photography as archival material for historical research purposes has never been properly or adequately considered or expressed. No public or private organization has estab­lished specific dates, events, or areas citing the aerial photography that must be retained at all cost. For example, unlike written documents relative to the Cuban missile crisis that have been care­fully screened, catalogued and pre­served, no similar effort has been ap­plied to the cans of aerial photography that were interpreted and became criti­cal to the vital national security decisions made at that time. An additional obsta­cle to researching and reviewing older film is the fact that the documentation as to why a particular mission was flown, or the results of the interpretation, have long since been separated from the pho­tography. But if our experience when researching the Auschwitz-Birkenau film is a valid example, much of the documentation can be found through competent research.

There are presently no standards or mandatory methods for cataloguing or controlling aerial photography; neither is there a standard method for classifying the subject matter contained in the film. A number of state, local, and private organizations have developed their own systems. The coordinate system worked out by the National Cartographic Information Center in Reston, Virginia is a step forward.

Aerial photography is a major means of recording history. To preserve this precious historical legacy, historians must take a more active role in:

1. Insisting that they have a role at local, state, and federal levels in deter­ mining what aerial photography is to be preserved;
2. Preserving older aerial photog­raphy in our archives. The highest priority should be accorded the copy­ing of nitrate-based film onto safety­ based film before it decomposes;
3. Encouraging colleges, universi­ties, and the military academies, with the cooperation of professional societ­ies, to teach photo interpretation courses in their  history departments;
4. Encouraging an inventory of or­ganizations that archive aerial pho­tography. Assemble a catalogue, giving details of those organizations and the quantity and type of aerial pho­tography they hold;
5. Pressing for the development of a standard method of codifying, cor­relating, and retrieving aerial photog­raphy;
6. Working with other professional organizations in other disciplines in support of all these efforts.

Not being a trained historian, I have been repeatedly warned that in surfac­ing these issues, I am trespassing on the historian’s turf. My considered response is that I am not attempting to encroach upon their territory but, rather, I am giving them twenty new acres to plow.