the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Sorry, but that guy doesn't look even remotely close to Tom Cruise.



...

Excellent photo collection, thanks for sharing. (Although I wish they didn't do that silly coloring on some of them...)

Fantastic presentation and good job vetting the photos. Very little to quibble about in the descriptions. Thanks for sharing!

Always interesting to see historical pic's as these....I'm not versed in how to handle the Japanese sword except for the very little Bokken experience I got from my now long time ago Aikido practice...In the above pic of the Samurai I notice how he grip the sword and his out pointing elbows, well he's a Samurai so obvious he got it right,,but you guys who are long timers in traditional JMA's what's your opinion on that?.......But his posture over all looks cool, and his leg stance reminds of such that can be found in some southern styles of GongFu and also Karate

i I notice how he grip the sword and his out pointing elbows, well he's a Samurai so obvious he got it right,,but you guys who are long timers in traditional JMA's what's your opinion on that?.......

He's got an armor on. He would have no space for his arms for cutting down if he didn't have his elbows out.

Yes I too where thinking that's because the armor. How about the sword grip? It almost seem that he's wrists "pointing out" or he slightly curl in his hands? In the Aikido bokken(wood sword) I practiced we where instructed to grip the sword in a "Yonkyu" kind of way, gives more stability when cutting it was said....don't know how to describe the Aikido Yonkyu tecniq verbal but those here that practice traditionally JMA might understand what I mean.....of course his grip probably also depends on his forearm/hand armor............By the way, he's doing a Tom Cruise thing by not wearing a helmet

Awesome group of images.

I expect this posture was exagerated for the photographer in the instance above

But i would suspect this is also to do with armor and lack of helmet, the grip is unusual as you say. But i am sure there is utility to it if the chap is a commander.

In the Itto Ryu i studied we would attack the wrist/forearm of such postures.

The stance is also strange. Good for stability, bad for mobility--so a nono in sword work. But, what if he was about to, or had already initiated, a sudden 180 degree turn? This would explain both the raised elbows and stance. Hmm...

The stance is also strange. Good for stability, bad for mobility--so a nono in sword work. But, what if he was about to, or had already initiated, a sudden 180 degree turn? This would explain both the raised elbows and stance. Hmm...

With the camera technology of the time i highly doubt that he was in any motion. I would wager it is just a stylised stance for the camera and nothing more.

That rear foot position is very interesting though.

middleway wrote:
In the Itto Ryu i studied we would attack the wrist/forearm of such postures.

Yes such an attack came to my mind when I saw the pic

middleway wrote:

The stance is also strange. Good for stability, bad for mobility--so a nono in sword work. But, what if he was about to, or had already initiated, a sudden 180 degree turn? This would explain both the raised elbows and stance. Hmm...

With the camera technology of the time i highly doubt that he was in any motion. I would wager it is just a stylised stance for the camera and nothing more.

That rear foot position is very interesting though.

Yes his stance/ foot positions seem very unusual and impractical for fencing, could be as Ian think about that he's about to or have just made a turn...But as you hint about the cameras of that time slightest move would make a blur, look at the tip of the sword seem broader as if he had moved a little...

middleway wrote:

The stance is also strange. Good for stability, bad for mobility--so a nono in sword work. But, what if he was about to, or had already initiated, a sudden 180 degree turn? This would explain both the raised elbows and stance. Hmm...

With the camera technology of the time I highly doubt that he was in any motion. I would wager it is just a stylised stance for the camera and nothing more.

That rear foot position is very interesting though.

I can't say for sure whether there was intentional motion (although there was some, judging from the blur on the rear leg), but old photos often purposefully posed in ways to simulate realistic action:

http://www.businessinsider.com/1800s-ba ... ay-1888-11

I agree that it's plausible that the elbows are flared for theatrics--there are many ukiyo-e that depict this same "elbows out" kamae.

But, That doesn't really explain the footwork.

Furthermore, action photography did exist in the late 1800's. Just look at some of the work from the most prominent photographers of the time (say, Eadweard Muybridge). h

I just don't see that photo as reflective of particular aesthetic intent by the subject.

Can't tell me this guy ain't moving. Toes forward, elbows in, forward intent here:

http://twistedsifter.com/2011/06/pictur ... irca-1860/

I'd say, same guy, same shoot?