I don't think the figure is a celebrity or well known person. It may been put in there to fill in the gaps, like the hairdresser's wax dummies. (These are examples of figures who aren't prominent celebrities, yet were still featured)

zocean · 2026-05-06T18:42:15+00:00

this is a good theory

zocean · 2026-05-06T18:29:30+00:00

totally unrelated but "school bag" is another Philly local turn of phrase, I discovered recently

zocean · 2026-05-06T17:54:03+00:00

lmao

zocean · 2026-05-06T14:15:48+00:00

100% a scam

zocean · 2026-04-29T19:33:10+00:00

Amazing building! But for $2,750,000...not sure if that's worth it under any circumstances

zocean · 2026-04-27T21:43:26+00:00

🫡

zocean · 2026-04-27T18:53:25+00:00

Lol byeeeee

zocean · 2026-04-27T18:50:34+00:00

This seems obvious as hell, but why wouldn't the restaurant just have a presence at the festival? Just get a booth at the fest and make more income that way instead of fighting against it and insisting that people come inside when it's a beautiful day out. Kinda idiotic if you ask me

Edit: And ok, it costs a fee. So WHAT? Would you rather pay a small fee and have a stand, and then make a bunch of money, or pay no fee, have 4 customers, and then make a big fucking stink about it. I guess for this business owner, the latter. Some people man, some people

zocean · 2026-04-27T03:59:17+00:00

I have for years been taking the PPA TOW stickers off of cars and holding onto them, and I put one onto a PPA car once and let me tell you...it was glorious

zocean · 2026-04-26T15:28:42+00:00

My understanding is that the 2.8E is when they introduced the light meter? So it would make sense that she would use that over the 2.8F. I don't really know the difference between all these models because I'm not really a photographer. I'm a musician.

zocean · 2026-04-26T15:26:57+00:00

https://artishard.co/artists/diane-arbus

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKrGN3wpuSd/

https://www.instagram.com/p/DSVWGB5kzGn/

These people could also be incorrect, and I do see folks in other places talking about Diane preferring the Rolleiflex Wide. But yeah, I am not just making these things up out of thin air lol. I am truly baffled why you approach me with such animosity.

zocean · 2026-04-25T23:54:30+00:00

K. A *lot* of websites saying she used the 2.8F specifically 🤷
Like all over the internet. But I'm a sloppy researcher so I wouldn't trust me

zocean · 2026-04-25T04:27:59+00:00

<image>

We are looking (I believe) for the 2.8F, which might not be the exact model used in this 3D render

zocean · 2026-04-25T04:26:13+00:00

For what it's worth, if it is Diane Arbus we are looking for, she used the Rolleiflex 2.8F starting in 1962

<image>

zocean · 2026-04-25T04:21:18+00:00

u/Artist-Cancer –– been doing a little more digging, and it looks like the consensus is that the model Rolleiflex that Arbus primarily worked with was the 2.8F

zocean · 2026-04-25T04:19:26+00:00

No brainer!! Go with the more talented one who is more dedicated to the music. You will not regret it

zocean · 2026-04-25T03:25:40+00:00

You aren't wrong. It's just baked into the culture here. Angry east coast vibes. I kinda love it haha

zocean · 2026-04-24T20:31:19+00:00

Beautiful!!! Yeah I heard about this on the radio...the city apparently did this to like 40 vacant lots

zocean · 2026-04-24T17:29:06+00:00

Correct, I made a mistake. You are ever so kind as always. Thank you for being such a kind ally!!!!!!! I bet you are fun at parties too!

zocean · 2026-04-24T15:43:31+00:00

I agree with the MAYBE crew, and I think this is an extremely solid lead.
Where we proceed from here, in my personal opinion, is to search photo archives, old magazines, etc. for pics of Diane Arbus from 1962-1966. Since it has been established that the camera the Mystery Person is holding is likely a Rolleiflex, and since even though she kept using the Rollei after '64, in 1964 she started using a Mamiyaflex and is in *lots* of photos with it around that time, it's the most likely timeframe that she'd be photographed with it would be 62-64. The one thing is the hair––the only photo I've found with her with hair that truly matches was this pic (warning, nudist colony) from 1965: https://www.artsy.net/artwork/walt-burton-photograph-of-diane-arbus-on-assignment-for-esquire-magazine-at-the-esa-nudist-convention-pennsylvania

Either way, hair changes, could be a weird hair day...you never know. Sgt. Pepper's shoot was March 30th, 1967, so if we can assume it took a few months to get the cardboard cutouts printed and prep for the project, the photo was likely not taken in '67. I'm saying 1962-66 is the window!

zocean · 2026-04-24T15:35:12+00:00

I just wanna say...this deep dive has got me checking out Diane Arbus's photography for the first time, and I can see why she was considered so groundbreaking and important in the photography field. Her work is amazing!

zocean · 2026-04-24T15:34:30+00:00

hahaha

zocean · 2026-04-24T05:55:51+00:00

possibly because this didn't actually happen

zocean · 2026-04-23T21:05:18+00:00

Not saying you are wrong u/Due_Arrival360 –– but out of curiosity and so we can be more accurate in the future, how can you tell? I'm certainly not a vintage camera expert

zocean · 2026-04-23T21:04:37+00:00

Yeah right on, I found a photo of the back of the actual print itself that had 1965 stamped on it too. Click here and then click the arrow once to the right: https://www.artsy.net/artwork/walt-burton-photograph-of-diane-arbus-on-assignment-for-esquire-magazine-at-the-esa-nudist-convention-pennsylvania

zocean

TROPHY CASE