| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/10/2006 11:21:11 AM · #26 |
After further and brief scrutiny, it seems that the various reflections and coloring around fish 1 and 3 are also the same.
edit to specify that I'm referring to the areas below the fish.
Message edited by author 2006-09-10 11:22:54. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 11:23:41 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
Hold on a second, and take a look at fish 1 and 3.
There are what appear to be a pair of waterdrops next to each of these two fish that appear to be identical and identically oriented to each other and to the fish. The waterdrops that I am referring to are towards the tail end of the visible part of their bodies.
edit to add: that the eyes on these two fish are also looking back while fish number 2 is not. |
That is what I just said right before you posted, glad you agree ;) |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 11:25:40 AM · #28 |
| Yeah, I just noticed that you beat me to it. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 11:25:52 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
Hold on a second, and take a look at fish 1 and 3.
There are what appear to be a pair of waterdrops next to each of these two fish that appear to be identical and identically oriented to each other and to the fish. The waterdrops that I am referring to are towards the tail end of the visible part of their bodies.
edit to add: that the eyes on these two fish are also looking back while fish number 2 is not. |
I see the exact same similarity. Very, very odd. There is indeed a blob of water identically positioned near the back of each fish.
EDIT*- There are a few drops under it and a splash as well which are identical. I am almost positive that some cloning went on there- one drop of water is a coincidence- when three drops and a splash coincide, the only 'coincidence' is the fact that I noticed.
Message edited by author 2006-09-10 11:27:52. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 11:28:55 AM · #30 |
First and third fish may be the same...the middle fish is different.
|
|
|
|
09/10/2006 11:51:18 AM · #31 |
Does it really matter if the fish was cloned? After all, he's not bound by the 'no major element' rule that we have here at DPC. :D
Nowadays, many writers have their own web sites. Have you considered writing the author and asking him about it?
|
|
|
|
09/10/2006 04:23:10 PM · #32 |
From the pics above: 
Both of then are the same, only one is more blurry. The drops, as already stated, are the same. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 04:40:40 PM · #33 |
| I think he cloned. That would be an automatic DQ here at DPC. Can we ask him for his exif and original image? |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 05:08:43 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
Have you considered writing the author and asking him about it? |
Yup. Maybe there's a special prize for the first person to spot it. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 05:40:11 PM · #35 |
It could become the great fish scandal of 06'. 1 fish and I would have given this a 5, more than one fish and I give it a ... 6. So you could see why he might be motivated to cheat.
Cloning is to photography what steroids are to sports. First the baseball players, now the photographers. They will do anything to win. |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 06:08:19 PM · #36 |
| This thread really should have been titled Somethin' fishy :P |
|
|
|
09/10/2006 07:06:45 PM · #37 |
| I agree that it is cloned. And I don't believe the shot is very spectacular, with or without the clone. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:00:59 AM · #38 |
| Maybe that someone should actually contact the author of the book and ask him directly. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:16:56 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by mist:
Originally posted by micknewton:
Have you considered writing the author and asking him about it? |
Yup. Maybe there's a special prize for the first person to spot it. |
Or the first person to respond... hehehe. I'll let you know if I won, thanks. -jk
Hard to believe, but very good eye of  Modurn to spot it. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:22:15 AM · #40 |
absolutely cloned, water and all
fishy image --- click here
something verrrry fishy going on here...
Message edited by ursula - changed large image to link. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:23:01 AM · #41 |
Damn, you guys realy dont have anything better to do. LOL. :-) OK, fine - fish 1 and 2 are definately twins - so what? the book was on lighting or exposure or something.
By the way - I believe fish 3 was original, fish 1 was cloned from 3. Definately would've been a DQ on DPC.
SC Anouncement - Entry "Fish out of water" was DQ'd. We say congratulations to the NEW number 243rd position. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:25:05 AM · #42 |
I was going what a ridiculous thread you have too much time on your hands then I remembered I have the book in question and had to check it out!
the author in his notes for the picture says he shot this on slide film and was very pleased when he saw the salmon when looking though his slides on the light box. Well the fish in question has been cloned unless the two fish are so identical they cause exactly the same disturbance in the water around them.
well seen but still ridiculous!
Photography is a lie especially digital photograpy. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:30:55 AM · #43 |
| After looking at it more closely, I would not say the fish were cloned, Maybe something in front of the fish was cloned. I do spot diferences in the fish, like % body out of the water and the water splashes behind their backs. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:45:36 AM · #44 |
I have that book and it's all about capturing what's in front of you in the best possible way. It's completely inappropriate to have any cloning in those pictures. It defeats the purpose of the book.
|
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:49:39 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by marcellieb:
After looking at it more closely, I would not say the fish were cloned, Maybe something in front of the fish was cloned. I do spot diferences in the fish, like % body out of the water and the water splashes behind their backs. |
I would say the fish 1 was cloned into the second picture. That extra string of droplets is better explained by the rest of the splashes in shot 1. He was cut very closely along the back to remove the rest of the whitewater there,I think. I tried overlays, but my PS skills are non-existant and I couldn't get the dimensions/angles right. Cutting off the head, tho', did match it up and the same happened with a couple sections of water.
The water behind seems to match until about the apex of the curve of the back....
(this is what happens when I sit up all night, unable to sleep but with no energy for anything constructive!) |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 10:21:52 AM · #46 |
This is one of the funniest threads on DPC in a long time. Really made me laugh. Thanks all!!!
|
|
|
|
10/26/2006 10:34:39 AM · #47 |
i just shot the most incredible photograph!
look at this incredible shot!
i was so lucky to get all 19 fish together in one photo!!
it was a million to one shot
Message edited by ursula - changed large image to link. |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 10:49:16 AM · #48 |
This all reminds me of the Art Wolfe 'scandal' about his book Migrations and the zebra picture with extra zebras added
//www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/dec98/wolfe4.html |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 10:49:40 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by slide12345678:
i just shot the most incredible photograph!
|
LOL!!! |
|
|
|
10/26/2006 10:53:13 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by slide12345678:
i just shot the most incredible photograph!
i was so lucky to get all 19 fish together in one photo!!
it was a million to one shot |
Fantastic - just spat my coffee all over my monitor ;-)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 11:26:52 AM EDT.
