Dig deeper with this...
http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=375e4f0411d81df0c9fe0122ab650865e7144002.283227
On 30 January 2013 11:41, Ian Nichols <ian.a.nichols@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 30 January 2013 00:38, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >wrote:
>
> > I've been puzzling over how this shot was done
> > <http://www.naturephotoblog.com/index.php?showimage=324>
> > It's clearly a very long night exposure in order to show a blue sky and
> > significant color in many of the stars. But despite the lengthy
> > exposure there are no star trails. That means the exposure was guided
> > on an equatorial mount. But the would be contra-indicated by the fact
> > that the rocks do not display any motion blurring. The rocks are
> > clearly lit by flash but I believe the sky exposure was so long as to
> > leave ghost images of the stationery rocks. But not ghosts are seen.
> >
> > Conclusion. Photoshop of two images.
> >
>
> I'm not quite convinced - looking at the horizon on the right of the
> picture, I think I can see a few stars superimposed over the ground, and
> likewise at the top edge of the right rock.
>
> --
> Stand firm for what you believe in, until and unless logic and experience
> prove you wrong. Remember: when the emperor looks naked, the emperor *is*
> naked, the truth and a lie are not "sort-of the same thing" and there is
> no aspect, no facet, no moment of life that can't be improved with pizza.
>
> -Daria Morgendorffer
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|