What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
81 Comments
- jiub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+65He is right, the dimensions are 1,337 x 460 pixels
- profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+38The readable comment gets the digg.
- freddo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39Another Astronomy Picture of the Day I really like is this one: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050401.html
- ekso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32When old photographers printed one area of a picture brighter than others (i.e., by exposing some areas of the paper to more light than others) they did not called it fake. Why with digital picture you cannot use this same technique? Where's the limit between fake or not?
Nobody painted anything on this picture, just the light was adjusted. I would not call it fake. - jofer, on 10/19/2007, -0/+32Wow... Before I followed the link, I thought this was going to be obviously fake...
It's an absolutely stunning scene, and it's fairly obviously real...
Just goes to show how incredibly bright Comet McNaught is! I wish I'd gotten to see it while it was still visible from the Northern Hemisphere! - AJRiddle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26Just to prove that it is real, it comes from NASA's astronomy picture of the day website. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
- pbaehr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Not included in the panorama is the fourth picture where two birds crashed into each other immediately above a UFO which was visible for just an instant between two clouds. Also, one of the birds was carrying an egg which hatched at the exact moment of exposure.
- Utopian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17When I parked my car today, the time on the ticket was 13:37. I updated my PayPal account and the PIN number they sent me to verify I was the owner of the account was 1337. Now I see this picture and it's 1337 pixels wide.
Is someone trying to tell me something or is it just the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon:
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=417
? - Quidam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17I can honestly say that this is one of the most amazing pictures I've ever seen on digg.
- iamnos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14That's not an egg, its a coconut, and those are swallows (European of course).
- Jimzip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@ kutza
Actually I assume the exposure was lenghtened to catch as much light as possible, especially when there was lightning, the only way to catch it properly is to set the exposure waaay up (this also explains the blurred people & possibly their faces, though the faces might just have been blurred because they asked for anonymity, even I agree that looks dodgy). With a long exposure, the tide didn't need to be out, the small waves crashing on the beach are blurred, giving the smooth appearance of the shoreline and making it look that way.
I want to believe it's real, because it's one of the most amazing photographs I've ever seen. Even if it is stitched together, it's a fricken great composition.
But something tells me it's the real deal.
Jimzip :D - ldkronos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Moron! Thats not fake...that's what you get when you do a time lapse image.
Look at the flare trails on the fireworks. When you see actual fireworks, they don't actually leave a trail that long. From my experience photographing fireworks, I'd say thats a 2 to 3 second exposure. In 2 to 3 seconds, people move. People sitting still watching the fireworks only move a little, so thats why you just see slightly blurry faces. People walking move quite a bit, which gives you a ghost image.
In addition, it is possible (though not certain) that the image came from multiple exposures stitched together (though it could be a single shot from a fisheye lens, and then de-fisheyed in photoshop). If it is stitched together, you often get some odd bluring/stretching (or even the same person showing up twice) where the stitching happens. - ohearn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10It's not a fake. They admit it's a panorama, in other words they had to take multiple shots to get the entire field of view. So they processed a little to get rid of the reflection from the fireworks. The pics were still all taken at the same time back to back at the same location. This is not uncommon in photography (the technique) and unless you want to use odd film sizes or a digital camera the uses an odd lens, this is how you produce the picture.
- novusopiate, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10All that 3 photograph panorama means is that there were 3 different panoramic cameras taking a shot at the same time. The "editing" would be piecing them together to make one photo and, like the caption said, reduce glare.
- markdr123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Atomic1fire, I think he was saying "oh my god guys...".
- MasteRR, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"When I parked my car today, the time on the ticket was 13:37. I updated my PayPal account and the PIN number they sent me to verify I was the owner of the account was 1337. Now I see this picture and it's 1337 pixels wide.
Is someone trying to tell me something or is it just the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon:
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=417
?"
Did you also notice that today's date is 13/37/2007? I think you are right. - n8r0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7you forgot to mention the eclipse and aurora as well.
- sciencebase, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Surely, it was taken with one "normal" camera being panned across the scene. there's nothing to suggest that the lightning flashed at the exact same instant as the fireworks cracked. In fact, lightning is notoriously to catch and two forks flashing simultaneously, perfectly exposed and the "reflection" on the as well....come on....it's a mock up. (The people are too well exposed for the sky to have come out like that too...at best it's a composite of half a dozen different exposures within a few moments of each other and exposed for particular areas of the composition. At worst, the whole thing's been mocked up (including the comet, which as out by 1.45 degrees for that location at that time anyway.
- entorix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Did you also notice that today's date is 13/37/2007? I think you are right."
actually...
mktime(0,0,0,13,37,2006) = 1170748800 = 02/06/2007
not quite today. but kinda funny/odd that it is actually tomorrow. - itchyfeet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6To the smartasses saying "Fake".
1 - It's three images stitched together. They are long exposure shots. That's how they captured the lightning.
2 - Fireworks, comet, lightning, yes, these things really happened at the same time. Millions of people in Perth experienced the same thing on Australia day 2007. I was there. I can honestly say it was one of the more amazing lightning shows I've seen in a while. I cannot say the same about the fireworks.
3 - Get a life. - vermin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Permalink to the description page: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070205.html
- itchyfeet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I repeat myself, but.....
Yes, there was a massive electrical storm at around the time of the various fireworks shows for Australia day in Perth on January 27, 2006. (The fireworks shows happened in Perth City, Armadale, Hillary's Boat Harbour and Fremantle (which looks suspiciously like where this pic was taken). The storm began to peak at around the time the fireworks began. It was one of the hottest Australia day holidays on record (around 41 degrees C / 105.8 F) for Perth, and on hot humid days in Perth, thunderstorms at sunset are becoming increasingly common.
That said, it's my guess that these pics would have been taken within minutes of eachother. When I was watching the storm, the lightning was going off roughly every 10 to 30 seconds. The fireworks were kind of continuous. Comet McNaught has been in the sky for a few weeks so I suppose it's feasible the images were taken within less than ten minutes of eachother.
The photographer deserves a medal for this photograph. It is truly a great work of art.... - diabolicglacier, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's nice to see something titled as "Amazing" that truly is just that.
- neave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The old adage of photography is so true here: in the right place at the right time! Fireworks, a comet and lightning all in one shot...
- raines00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I been photographing skylines like this one for almost 10 years now, especially lightning. I think this photograph is probably real. The ghosting, blurred faces, and the "flare" effect from the lights, fireworks and even the distant lights on the boats are all consistent with what I have seen in my work. At first I thought then reflections on the water were a little off but since looking at some old work I think they are very plausible. All these effects can be caused from holding the shutter open (over exposing the film) until lightning strikes, one of only two ways I know to get lightning. This was probably enhanced, but not in a manner that would make it fake. Can't comment on the comet, never had the chance to photograph them.
That said being a panoramic picture it is very possible that this is two or more photographs spliced together, since the lightning and the fireworks are some distance away from each other it would be possible that the photographs that make up this image were not taken at the same time. They would have to be taken very very very close together though.
Either way a very nice and very lucky photograph. - intense321, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@neave
It isn't "all in one shot". It's three pictures taken back-to-back, and a panorama is created in the photolab (or photoshop). - joach, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That's an historical picture!
- mupet0000, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2100% the best picture of this type of thing EVER.
- compgeek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3that's an absolutely amazing picture not only from a regular viewers perspective but also from a trained photographers.
I'll digg this - daybreaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3not so much good timing, as a prolonged exposure. The blurriness of the people, and the thickness of the fireworks explosions suggest it was a shot that was left open for a few seconds. That doesnt make it any less amazing, since this a common procedure for capturing lightning. The fact that they got so much other stuff in the shot is even more amazing.
- pvliii, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From the article:
"The above image is actually a three photograph panorama digitally processed to reduce red reflections from the exploding firework."
(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070205.html)
Great shot. - HisTumness, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Whoa, that's weird. I had never heard of damninteresting.com or Baader-Meinhof until I read Utopian's comment. Then I kept digging and found this arrticle:
http://www.digg.com/offbeat_news/An_Impostor_in_the_Family
which is also from damninteresting.com. So I experienced Baader-Meinhof from having learned about damninteresting.com, thus also experiencing Baader-Meinhof from Baader-Meinhof itself. I've been recursively experiencing Baader-Meinhof ever since, but hopefully next time I take a nap it'll sort itself out. - xParker, on 09/12/2008, -1/+3Seems real, good timing.
If it wasnt taken at the same time, then why does the darkness cary over to the left picture? - JussiK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The photo is taken by my brother Antti. It was not completely clear from my other post, because it was beant as a reply for one comment...
- bwilstyle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As a matter of fact, I see dead people in the picture as well.
- sdpdt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Incredible
- cuoops, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Speaking of Comet McNaught: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2007_01_08/McNaught_med.mpg
- the6thReplicant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah, perth!!!
ciao - Quidam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can honestly say that this is one of the best pictures I've ever seen.
- coldhandshake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This photograph is really cool, not as cool as if it was one exposure but still cool.: And for the argument between fake or real, think about it this way.: All three events happened at pretty close to the same time, I mean fireworks last minutes (30?), I've never witnessed a comet myself so I can't really speculate that timing, and lighting at that distance would be happening every few minutes or so probably.: So with that said, I think this photograph is as close to real as you can get.: And I'm pretty sure panorama is defined by the aspect ratio not the method taken to get it.:
- wisie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why is no body looking at the lightning? :s
- ajchavar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2actually thats due to the long exposure needed to capture the lightning (try timing a photo at the exact instant lightning strikes), the comet trail (needs a few seconds of the comet traveling to register the trail of light), and the fireworks (which are a bit over-exposed because you don't *need* a long exposure to get fireworks but it can help to get the full burst).
- loganhid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1if ppl are thinking why the ppl on the beach are looking at the fireworks and not the lightning, would you be more interested in the right side or the left?For me the right by far! and even if it was fake it is still well amazing!
- goldenmug8, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What a beautiful picture, i'm def saving this one
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1now that's pretty goddamn amazing :-)
that has to be a one in a billion chance of getting that shot - dugdal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
Photographers site
jkemppainen.com/antti/ - csm888, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/
Explanation: Sometimes the sky itself is the best show in town. On January 26, people from Perth, Australia gathered on a local beach to watch a sky light up with delights near and far. Nearby, fireworks exploded as part of Australia Day celebrations. On the far right, lightning from a thunderstorm flashed in the distance. Near the image center, though, seen through clouds, was the most unusual sight of all: Comet McNaught. The photogenic comet was so bright that it even remained visible though the din of Earthly flashes. Comet McNaught continues to move out from the Sun and dim, but should remain visible in southern skies with binoculars through the end of this month. The above image is actually a three photograph panorama digitally processed to reduce red reflections from the exploding firework. - alabamasucks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i love how those Aussies are looking all nonchalant about fireworks, a comet and lighting at the same time. Oh the exciting life they must lead.
- pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It may just be an uncorrected fisheye, or even a really wide rectilinear lens. It's tough to see barrel distortion when there are no vertical elements.
- itchyfeet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oops. 2007 I mean. :)
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 