look man, the reason it reminds you of sub-surface scattering is because it IS subsurface scattering. and the reason people have downrated you is because the remark came off as pretentious.this isn't slashdot yet ; )
A few things, to sum up all the question here with regard to the authenticity of these images and the use of Photoshop on them:These images are obviously photos taken of real mammatus cloud formations over Nebraska. I have seen the same thing over Austin, TX and it made it to the news that night as a big story - some meteorologists call them "Tiger Paws", as that's what they sometimes look like when they occur at sunset.With regard to the use of Photoshop: It's obvious some of the images were altered with color filtration and whatnot. It's interesting that nobody has commented on the "water" in the foreground of one of the images. It's taken from the same place many of the other images are - in front of that school or whatever it is. But in one, there is an obvious introduction of a common Javascript effect called "reflective water". So there's no doubt that these have been touched up with photo editing software.But the reality is that the cloud formations themselves are real, and really looked just like that in texture and shape. Yes, they do most certainly look rendered. But the fact is,when you're standing there underneath them looking at them they still look just as rendered - it's VERY freaky, indeed! But they are, nevertheless, real. All you have to do is look at all the other raw, untouched images of mammatus clouds available on the Internet, and you can see they really can, and often do, look just like that. Just appreciate the artistic accent given to them by the photographer with regard to color, filtration, etc. That's why he did it - to simply compliment the magic of nature with a little bit of artistic license. They are, after all, HIS photos.SK
I probably saw the same mammatus clouds that you did during the summer of 1985 in Madison. It was just after a tornadic thunderstorm went through. I have never seen a more dramatic display since (even during searches on the web). It seemed the entire sky was full of cottonballs. It's a shame that I didn't have a camera. My boyfriend at the time took a picture, but we have long since lost contact! I hope you get this reply as your comment was quite old. I found it while searching the web for a pic of the 1985 event...
I just wonder how will it feel if I touch them. Will it be smooth and soft or will just disappear. Have you seen the old refrigerators the ice formed in the ice tub looks similar. The procedure to form those ice balls are similar to mammatus clouds. http://www.whatisguide.net/0131-mammatus-clouds.html
quagApr 9, 2006
Anyone know the cause of these type of clouds? For those of you who are crying fowl, google them, seeming pretty real to me.
Closed AccountApr 10, 2006
They're definately real!
magicbouncerApr 10, 2006
They look like the clouds from Monty Python Animations
sportzstar01234Apr 10, 2006
Those are awesome!
mazzApr 10, 2006
Shut up.Digg has a science tag.you are an ass.
fitchmicahApr 10, 2006
look man, the reason it reminds you of sub-surface scattering is because it IS subsurface scattering. and the reason people have downrated you is because the remark came off as pretentious.this isn't slashdot yet ; )
numba1xclusiveApr 10, 2006
looks animeish tbh
stevekasianMay 4, 2006
A few things, to sum up all the question here with regard to the authenticity of these images and the use of Photoshop on them:These images are obviously photos taken of real mammatus cloud formations over Nebraska. I have seen the same thing over Austin, TX and it made it to the news that night as a big story - some meteorologists call them "Tiger Paws", as that's what they sometimes look like when they occur at sunset.With regard to the use of Photoshop: It's obvious some of the images were altered with color filtration and whatnot. It's interesting that nobody has commented on the "water" in the foreground of one of the images. It's taken from the same place many of the other images are - in front of that school or whatever it is. But in one, there is an obvious introduction of a common Javascript effect called "reflective water". So there's no doubt that these have been touched up with photo editing software.But the reality is that the cloud formations themselves are real, and really looked just like that in texture and shape. Yes, they do most certainly look rendered. But the fact is,when you're standing there underneath them looking at them they still look just as rendered - it's VERY freaky, indeed! But they are, nevertheless, real. All you have to do is look at all the other raw, untouched images of mammatus clouds available on the Internet, and you can see they really can, and often do, look just like that. Just appreciate the artistic accent given to them by the photographer with regard to color, filtration, etc. That's why he did it - to simply compliment the magic of nature with a little bit of artistic license. They are, after all, HIS photos.SK
swandogSep 16, 2007
I probably saw the same mammatus clouds that you did during the summer of 1985 in Madison. It was just after a tornadic thunderstorm went through. I have never seen a more dramatic display since (even during searches on the web). It seemed the entire sky was full of cottonballs. It's a shame that I didn't have a camera. My boyfriend at the time took a picture, but we have long since lost contact! I hope you get this reply as your comment was quite old. I found it while searching the web for a pic of the 1985 event...
JDProutyJan 7, 2009
The gods must be angry! It looks like they're mooning us. :p
suzied84Feb 22, 2011
I just wonder how will it feel if I touch them. Will it be smooth and soft or will just disappear. Have you seen the old refrigerators the ice formed in the ice tub looks similar. The procedure to form those ice balls are similar to mammatus clouds.
http://www.whatisguide.net/0131-mammatus-clouds.html