 Click for larger picture |
Sunday, August 27, 2006
7 comments:
-
azlibertarian said...
-
...my sphincter slam shut...
Mine too. But I don't care for heights. Not one little bit.
Disregarding the leap for a moment, what picture could be had on the smaller spire that could not also be had from the larger one?
And, to attempt the leap while carrying your camera bag, and while wearing sandals? Surely institutionalization or a body bag awaits. -
8/27/06, 3:16 PM
-
Howard said...
-
Can you spell fotoshoppe? How about the guy who allegedly shot this picture? Was he hanging upside down from a crashing plane?
-
8/27/06, 3:45 PM
-
Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
It could be photoshopped, but a damned good one.
-
8/27/06, 3:53 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Okay, upon seeing the enlarged versions, it's a fun photshop or a suggested suicide by photoshop. If it were actual, the next shot would've been the bloody mass at the base. That's my logic, and I'm stickin' to it. Juice
-
8/27/06, 4:03 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
The guy shown leaping in photos 2 and 3 is wearing differnt pants than the guy in photo 1.
B. Bartelson -
8/27/06, 10:19 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Hmmm, I don't know - I've done a lot of photos and don't find the color shift to be unusual. All the shadows show is photo #1 was taken at a different time than #2 and #3. I would say the pants are the same but there is color shift, probably a simple matter of not being hypersensitive to making them perfect. Could it be Photoshopped? Of course - some folks are true masters.
-
8/27/06, 11:13 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
I'd say it's Photoshopped, but not as most commenters seem to be thinking.
The "leap" looks genuine. What looks bogus to me is the background. It looks out of scale and out of focus to the foreground.
I know, I know -- depth of field. But if the photo was taken from the apparent distance indicated by the evidence within the shop, the background would in essence be at "infinity," and thus in-focus.
In order to get the view angle necessary otherwise would require a wide-angle lens -- thus greater depth of field.
But if a lower-resolution shot were sampled up and composited in behind the foreground rocks, it might look exactly like the background in this shot.
Mark Alger -
8/28/06, 9:15 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)