Awesome Pictures Thread

[Goumindong]

Legitimately awesome  

Click for larger.

Yes, awesome fits!

Might be dumb question, but how did they manage to create that image? Using the size of the ship to judge scale the camera must be quite far away from the iceberg. That looks like awfully clear water / bright lightning.

Forced perspective. The iceberg is actually quite close to the camera.

For instance here is the same camera/lens/f-stop for two shots of a different iceberg which is further away

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18160974


In the first you can see the iceberg in focus, the water not in focus and the water line being flat. He moves up a little bit and for the second shot and brings the foreground in focus. Now the iceberg isn't in focus (angle and exposure time also appear to change a bit). You can tell most obviously by the icebreaker (in the same position as it is in both photos) being very out of focus in the second photo.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18160973


-----

For the shot in the quotes we can see the water line and the iceberg in focus at the same time, with the ship not in focus. F/2.8 has a relatively short depth of field (well at least allows the shortest possible for that lens) and so in order to be able to capture both the iceberg and the water line in focus we must be pretty close to the iceberg and relatively far from the ship. You can even see how the front of the iceberg is much more in focus than the rest.

From there its just a slightly long exposure time in order to get the glow from the iceberg. Which, being the only thing white under water, reflects quite easily through the clear water.

[Viin]

I bet the boat is further away than you think.

[apocrypha]

Very wide angle lens judging by the extreme depth of field, probably a fairly high ISO (I'd guess 1600+, there's what looks like heavy cleaned up noise in the darker areas of the water) and lots of post-processing to un-fisheye it and get the exposures matching across the frame.

That and spending weeks freezing your arse off in the Arctic/Antarctic dipping your expensive camera gear in bloody icy water regularly  

Edit: Heh, Goum did some actual research and Viin's completely wrong, sorry Viin, it's actually a lot closer than it looks in the pic.

[Goumindong]

Very wide angle lens judging by the extreme depth of field, probably a fairly high ISO (I'd guess 1600+, there's what looks like heavy cleaned up noise in the darker areas of the water) and lots of post-processing to un-fisheye it and get the exposures matching across the frame.

That and spending weeks freezing your arse off in the Arctic/Antarctic dipping your expensive camera gear in bloody icy water regularly  

Edit: Heh, Goum did some actual research and Viin's completely wrong, sorry Viin, it's actually a lot closer than it looks in the pic.

Lens is a 15mm "full frame" fish eye. [see the links he says what he took the photo with]. The camera is a full frame sensor and so should capture the full 180 deg on this lens.

For an example of how this translates to the more well known fisheye lenses see below. It wouldn't take much if any cropping in order to make the image(if any) and unless you know a frame of reference for the distortion you would have a hard time making it out. This is partially because the normal human full field of view is about 170 to 180 deg [I.E. including peripheral] and so we don't (i think) have much of a problem processing such images into flat spaces

http://allphotolenses.com/public/files/users/image/05_fisheye.jpg

I am not sure how far away the boat is, it could be quite far. But its almost certainly not close. So Viin is correct if anything.(unless he is talking about the boat the camera person is on)

Fake edit:

I was wrong on the f-stops. i read the f from the lens and that that was what was used but he actually used f/16 in all the shots [the 2.8 is the max aperture for the lens and is part of the lens description i guess] for a very long depth of field.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18157058

You can look at the details for more. ISO is 800. 1/400th of a second exposure (overexposed for 1/3rd of an f-stop standard exposure ). He did use photoshop but it doesn't say what he did. Shampoo on the underwater lens housing to defeat beading

[Khaldun]

Makes more sense that it's f16--f2.8 would blurred the ship and any part of the iceberg not in a fairly thin focal plane--the only way to get it all crisp would be to focus stack a whole bunch of shots, and with the water in some kind of motion that would be hard. Actually at f16 he'd probably still have to blend some exposures to get the image he got.

[IainC]

Makes more sense that it's f16--f2.8 would blurred the ship and any part of the iceberg not in a fairly thin focal plane--the only way to get it all crisp would be to focus stack a whole bunch of shots, and with the water in some kind of motion that would be hard. Actually at f16 he'd probably still have to blend some exposures to get the image he got.

A 15mm fisheye on a full-frame body probably focuses to infinity relatively close to the camera, so f16 would be enough without stacking focuses or compositing the ship in separately.

[calapine]

Thank you Goumindong for taking the time to explain in detail. Always nice to learn something. :)



Edit: This is a picture thread, so here: 'Generic awesome picture #0815'





Faroe Islands

[Tannhauser]

That place is stunning!  Looks like it needs some Freedom (tm)!

[lamaros]

Maybe it's a tiny ship and a small piece of ice, with the mountain way in the background.  

Too late to the party.

[Sir T]

You never know what you can find in an old book. Semi NSFW

[Ironwood]

Seriously ?

That's enormously cool if true.

[IainC]

Seriously ?

That's enormously cool if true.

They are called fore-edge paintings.

[Ironwood]

Never seen the like on a book that old.  So very, very cool.

[Lakov_Sanite]

You had to be really good at hiding your porn back then.

[Sky]

Nobody expects the Porn Inquisition.

[Khaldun]

I read recently about a scholar of 17th Century literature who was looking at a volume of poetry and literary miscellany that had a whole bunch of pornographic material hidden in the middle of it. Actually porn of various kinds was one of the first things that printing presses were used for after the Bible, which is not a surprise, though a fairly good amount of what we know was printed was destroyed at some point.

[Draegan]

It's a video but it's pretty fucking awesome.

https://youtu.be/QajyNRnyPMs

[Sky]

TIL the Library of Alexandria was ancient Pornhub.

[penfold]

This is quite an extraordinary series of photos showing a Tibetan Sky Burial, which I thought was more about leaving the corpse to be scavenged over time and less..... efficient.

Content Warning: nudity, gore, dismemberment, cadavers.

http://www.porjati.net/awful/655-tradiciya-poxoron-na-tibete.html

[pxib]

This is quite an extraordinary series of photos showing a Tibetan Sky Burial, which I thought was more about leaving the corpse to be scavenged over time and less..... efficient.

Their undertakers' job seems a little gorier than ours, especially that latter bit, but I can't argue with the results. Body-B-Gone.

[01101010]

Yeah that is pretty fascinating and morbid. I'm requesting a Norse funeral on some lake when I die.

[Strazos]

That's actually pretty awesome.

[Nebu]

This is quite an extraordinary series of photos showing a Tibetan Sky Burial, which I thought was more about leaving the corpse to be scavenged over time and less..... efficient.

Content Warning: nudity, gore, dismemberment, cadavers.

http://www.porjati.net/awful/655-tradiciya-poxoron-na-tibete.html

Reminded me of gross anatomy in med school. Fewer vultures though.

[IainC]

Reminded me of gross anatomy in med school. Fewer vultures though.

Your med school didn't have a law department?

[Signe]

There were dead stuff and porn on that page!!!   

[Phildo]

Content Warning: nudity, gore, dismemberment, cadavers.

[Sky]

I'm requesting a Norse funeral on some lake when I die.

Yup. That's been my request for over 20 years, not sure about the legality of it.

[01101010]

I'm requesting a Norse funeral on some lake when I die.

Yup. That's been my request for over 20 years, not sure about the legality of it.

Claim you are a sovereign citizen... it'll be fine. 

[Merusk]

You'll be dead and free of the consequences of the illegality. If you haven't spawned heirs willing to break any laws you haven't earned the funeral.

 

[Goumindong]

I'm requesting a Norse funeral on some lake when I die.

Yup. That's been my request for over 20 years, not sure about the legality of it.

A little bit of researching finds that

A) States probably require that a license to cremate a body. In WA the law says you need one to "operate a crematorium or conduct a cremation".

B) You will need a license to distribute cremated remains in some areas. But it looks to be explicitly legal if over 3 miles out to sea. WA makes it explicitly legal to dispose of cremated remains in public waterways

C) States almost certainly have regulations with regards to when you can burn.

But

D) nothing that explicitly says where a cremation must take place

Such, it seems that its may be possible to get a crematory to perform a cremation either at sea, or in a public water way.

[Samwise]

You'll be dead and free of the consequences of the illegality. If you haven't spawned heirs willing to break any laws you haven't earned the funeral.

 

This.

If a family member or a close friend wanted a Viking funeral, by God I'd give them a Viking funeral.  Fuck the police.

[01101010]

[apocrypha]

The Lego Gaming Computer

[Goumindong]

[Sir T]

Someone has released an archive of 10,000 publicly available images that astronauts took on the Moon missions. Some amazing pics in these Theres 142 pages of images.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/page1