OK geometry gurus! Is this picture photoshopped?

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

07/09/2009 06:24:11 PM · #26

Originally posted by JH:

OCD much?

Here's my take on it. You measured 55 degrees as the angle of the rays. I think this is an unreliable measurement.

First, the 'rays' might not be rays at all, but caused by variations in the density of the mist. Secondly, it looks like a long-exposure shot, so any lighting effects/shadows caused during the exposure will be moving during the shot.

I'm not sure how sun rays move around in Ireland, but here in the Pacific NW they stay in place. The ray itself stays in place and only moves with the sun. It appears and disappears depending on how much particulate matter (in this case mist) happens to be in the beam. It doesn't jump hither and tither. Other rays may be exposed and disappear, but they will all be coming from the same source and angle, the sun.

Anyway, I've come to the conclusion they could be quite real. The sun does seem to be coming perhaps straight down the river. At the end of March that would be at about 11:15 AM with the sun at a height of about 42 degrees. In the future (another benefit of this whole exercise), I will know to be looking for the sun when it is looking straight down the creek.

Message edited by author 2009-07-09 18:24:41.

Apple iPhone 5

07/09/2009 06:26:32 PM · #27

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I'm not sure how sun rays move around in Ireland, but here in the Pacific NW they stay in place.

I don't know to be honest. Here in Ireland we never actually see the Sun.

Konica Minolta MF 85mm f/1.7

07/09/2009 06:28:16 PM · #28

Originally posted by JH:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm not sure how sun rays move around in Ireland, but here in the Pacific NW they stay in place.

I don't know to be honest. Here in Ireland we never actually see the Sun.

LoL.

briantammy

Olympus PEN E-P3

07/09/2009 06:34:00 PM · #29

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

07/09/2009 06:36:49 PM · #30

Originally posted by briantammy:

That's what I was trying to describe earlier.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

07/09/2009 06:41:49 PM · #31

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by kirbic:
Yep, definitely possible. Imagine the sun directly behind you and shining through trees into fog in front of you. No matter the angle of the sun to the horizon, the rays you see will be perfectly vertical.

It seems this would imply that the only time the angle of the rays would match the azimuth value would be when the sun was exactly 90Â° to the left or right.

True, or when the sun is directly overhead (azimuth angle 90Â°) or on the horizon (azimuth angle 0Â°). The first situation never happens unless you are within the tropics (S of Tropic of Cancer, N of Tropic of Capricorn). The second would only be observable with a completely clear horizon.

FireBird

07/09/2009 06:47:55 PM · #32

While researching Punch Bowl Falls on Google Earth I found this image. Unfortunately the Falls are just outside the high-rez scan of the area so it's not possible to do a 3d visualization of the area in question. The photographer in question could clear his name by simply allow a few trusted people to view his raw file.

07/09/2009 06:49:53 PM · #33

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by kirbic:
Yep, definitely possible. Imagine the sun directly behind you and shining through trees into fog in front of you. No matter the angle of the sun to the horizon, the rays you see will be perfectly vertical.

It seems this would imply that the only time the angle of the rays would match the azimuth value would be when the sun was exactly 90Â° to the left or right.

True, or when the sun is directly overhead (azimuth angle 90Â°) or on the horizon (azimuth angle 0Â°). The first situation never happens unless you are within the tropics (S of Tropic of Cancer, N of Tropic of Capricorn). The second would only be observable with a completely clear horizon.

I think what was meant, and is probably true, is the angle would read true if you are shooting straight across the beam. That could be done, really, anywhere and at any time. Couldn't it?

EDIT: Nevermind, I didn't see your very first word..."true". ;)

Message edited by author 2009-07-09 18:51:46.

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

07/09/2009 06:51:16 PM · #34

This is another question I've had. How do people seem to find EXIF data on pictures on the net? Do they pull them up in PS and look at info? I'm assuming there is no EXIF on a picture like this.

K3Master

Pentax K-3

07/09/2009 06:51:53 PM · #35

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

This is another question I've had. How do people seem to find EXIF data on pictures on the net? Do they pull them up in PS and look at info? I'm assuming there is no EXIF on a picture like this.

There are browser plug-ins you can get that will give you exif data if the photo has anything.

rocket

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

07/09/2009 06:56:15 PM · #36

The Description on the exif is here.

"For many years a log blocked the view of Oregon's Beautiful Punch Bowl Falls, but it finally washed out in the winter of 09'. I rendered this image of the falls in spring after heavy rains fell the night before. The light and smaller falls on the side make for a unique image of this Oregon icon."

Not much else other than copyright info.

cheers

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

07/09/2009 07:15:53 PM · #37

Off topic...

...or is it? :P

FireBird

07/09/2009 07:24:05 PM · #38

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

This is another question I've had. How do people seem to find EXIF data on pictures on the net? Do they pull them up in PS and look at info? I'm assuming there is no EXIF on a picture like this.

I use Opanda IEXIF2 which integrates into FireFox browser. The author removed all the camera info on the image you referenced in the original post. It only shows text explaining the image.

zxaar

07/09/2009 07:35:29 PM · #39

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Off topic...

...or is it? :P

since its topless and not wearing underwear too, you should mark post as not safe for work. This belongs to nude gallery.

ElGordo

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

07/09/2009 08:25:45 PM · #40

Perhaps I am missing something here, but it seems to me that the angle of the sun with respect to the level plane depends entirely on three factors: A. the time of day; and B. the azimuth of the camera's field of view; and C. the latitude of the scene. Obviously, at sunrise or sunset the altitude of the sun is near zero, regardless of your latitude. The apparent angle of sunrays will change with azimuth of the camera with respect to the sun. In short, there are too many variables with too many unknowns to make a definitive determination about the correctness of the ray's angles as seen in this photo. But it is a great photo!!!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/09/2009 08:57:05 PM · #41

My Sun Rays Gallery

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

07/09/2009 09:30:12 PM · #42

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Robin: "Holy reptiles Batman! Is that Godzilla?"

Batman: "Yes Robin. I am afraid it is."

Robin: "But what about the bubbles?"

Batman: "I guess the Penguin got to him first."

zxaar

07/09/2009 09:54:25 PM · #43

Originally posted by CEJ:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Robin: "Holy reptiles Batman! Is that Godzilla?"

Batman: "Yes Robin. I am afraid it is."

Robin: "But what about the bubbles?"

Batman: "I guess the Penguin got to him first."

naa , bubbles are only because of fart. This Godzilla has stomach upset, eating at McDonalds lately.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/09/2009 09:57:29 PM · #44

Originally posted by zxaar:

This Godzilla has stomach upset, eating at McDonalds lately.

You mean eating McDonalds lately ... it's hard to find enough catsup to properly dip those golden arches ...

spiritualspatula

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/09/2009 10:34:49 PM · #45

Hey

DrAchoo, I'm curious where you found the hate site. Was it MarcAdamusLIES.com? There's a strong contingent of outdoors people that are bugged the hell by him too because they think he's utilizing the climbing site to advertise for his photography. Ample haters out there for him....When you first posted that picture of Punchbowl I couldn't figure out why the name sounded so damn familiar... it's all so clear now.