Ah yes. I see your problem. Your photo has the sun too much for the left. You have to take a picture with the sun *BEHIND* you. Try again.
As it is right now, the vanishing point of the shadows are veeeeeery to the right. If you have your camera with you or something, please try again. Perhaps we can still teach someone here and this may not have been a total waste of time.
Okay, explain why my shadow appears parallel to the pole shadow and all other shadows and Steve's shadow and the pole shadow are on radically different angles.
I would explain it, but for the fact that I don't know, and I honestly couldn't give a shit.
my final 2cp, because even a rotten bastard like me starts to feel bad kicking dogs this dumb.
basic perspective. start paying attention to the world around you. take an art class if you really just do not get it.
occam's razor. it makes goddamn sense.
Occam's Razor falls before a really good hoax.
Actually, I DID just take an art class and aced it.
Ironically, for the final we had to come up with a storyboard of sketches that told a story.
Include a person, something mechanical, something abstract, some other artist's style, something architectural... and draw part of it by non-traditional means.
The irony?
I used Steve Jobs holding an Apple, the iPod, the Apple Logo by Rob Janoff, 1 Infinite Loop, and the iPad.
I also cut a 2" wide Apple Logo from 1/4" thick steel with a plasma cutter and polished it.
BTW, the flaw with the wide-angle lens argument is the shadows of the power lines are pretty straight.
If it was a wide lens they'd curve a lot more as you go outward from center.
okay, notice the shadows on the floor. They are all "parallel" in the 3d universe. They are converging to a vanishing point to the right, as they should, in the perspective.
Yes, matrix you did. Except that it's all wrong. You don't need a "wide lens" to get that effect. You just need to be an average photographer and shoot the right direction with an average camera.
No, the vanishing point for shadow is so extreme I would think you need around 12-14 mm. for digital-size sensor to achieve that, which is no way that picture captured with that extreme wide angle.
Noticed the sun is actually to the right, or just behind, of photographer.
I don't think we'll settle this until one of us on the thread who lives in the city goes down to Flour + Water, stands in the same spot at the same time of day (note it was sunny, obviously a fake since it's never sunny in SF--sorry, as an Angeleno I couldn't resist) and put a guy where Steve was standing and take a pic. Even then there are people here who would explain it away I fear.
This is a great example of the pathetic power of the internet. A complete non-story on an internet site has managed to prompt 128 (and counting) comments relating to the authenticity of a photo included in said non-story.
Did you read the entire story? It seems clear that this has been shown to be a fake image. It never happened. Or if it did, someone went to a lot of trouble to create a fake image to illustrate a true story. Doesn't seem logical.
I don't really care whether it's true or not.
My post that you were responding to was questioning some jerk who said that the waiter should be fired. Whether the photo is real or not, the waiter did exactly what he should have done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesw
dumb move by the restaurant's manager.
Exactly the opposite.
Let's say Jobs gets pi$$ed off. How much pizza could he buy, anyway? Instead, he has 100 people who got tables while Jobs didn't so they're all going to run to tell their friends that they're more important than Steve Jobs.
Plus you have a million people who see the article on the Internet and wonder about this restaurant that's so exclusive that even Steve Jobs can't get in - even though he wanted to.
Plus, the people who would have eaten there anyway get the message that "we treat everyone fairly here" which is never a bad message.
Absolutely nothing negative for the restaurant (of course, the whole story may not even be true, and even if true, the owner may not have known about it until later. In any event, he's undoubtedly happy).
No, the vanishing point for shadow is so extreme I would think you need around 12-14 mm. for digital-size sensor to achieve that, which is no way that picture captured with that extreme wide angle.
Noticed the sun is actually to the right, or just behind, of photographer.
Or the pole is leaned. Problem solved.
No. Again, the sun is VERY low, and the vanishing point of the sun's shadows is WITHIN the photograph. This is why people are having trouble with the picture, perhaps, because it's unusual for these circumstances to happen. But if the vanishing point is within the picture, all vertical shadows must converge to it, regardless of "wide angles". It's simple geometry stuff, and angles have no fucking nothing to do with it. Believe in me, I am probably the smartest geometric geek you'll ever encounter in the netz.
This is a great example of the pathetic power of the internet. A complete non-story on an internet site has managed to prompt 128 (and counting) comments relating to the authenticity of a photo included in said non-story.
It's all rather dismal really.
Dismal?
No, the truly abysmal part is when people who find it dismal not only cannot turn away, but feel compelled to post.
okay, notice the shadows on the floor. They are all "parallel" in the 3d universe. They are converging to a vanishing point to the right, as they should, in the perspective.
The only reason they appear to converge is that the poles that are casting them are not perpendicular. They are angled bridge trusses. Find a picture with vertical poles.
No. Again, the sun is VERY low, and the vanishing point of the sun's shadows is WITHIN the photograph. This is why people are having trouble with the picture, perhaps, because it's unusual for these circumstances to happen. But if the vanishing point is within the picture, all vertical shadows must converge to it, regardless of "wide angles". It's simple geometry stuff, and angles have no fucking nothing to do with it. Believe in me, I am probably the smartest geometric geek you'll ever encounter in the netz.
No you don't understand, and the picture you posted is no use either. The sun is in different direction.
The picture could be real for 2 things only: The pole is leaned, or the wall behind SJ is not parallel to the line of poles.
Or perhaps you are clearly dumb at these things. Please enlighten me where do you see any contradiction on the picture. You speak of "sharp" shadows. Probably you are comparing them with the shadows of the cables which are blurred. And then you really think you are "on to" something. But you are not. You are only witnessing the product of your ignorance. Go outside and see a shadow of any cable that is well above you, like 4,5 meters. Then compare to your shadow.
Oh, hello! Your shadow is now sharper than the cable's! OMG do you realise what that means? It means, you are not really you, you are a photoshopped person!!
No. I compared Steve's "shadow" with the shadow of the person to the left of the camera.
Since they are both standing on the same plane, their shadows should have the same degree of sharpness and darkness.
That power line is 20+ feet higher than their heads, of course the shadow it casts is fuzzy.
Okay, before I just make fun out of you, please enlighten me, what *exactly* are you talking about. By the "telephone pole" shadow you are meaning the red lighted big shadows on the left?
Because if you aren't and you are speaking of the 3 lines more to the center, than you are also dumb. Those lines are more or less horizontal, so their shadows do not have to align with the shadows of vertical objects... get it?
I was referring to the shadow that appears at about the middle of the left edge of the pic, and goes diagonally toward the upper right on the sidewalk. Two people in the background are stepping on it. I don't see the "red lighted" shadow you are referring to. I didn't mean the telephone lines themselves.
Just curious. Why are you so hostile to people who are just enjoying a normal discourse about this subject? It makes you seem as though you think you are superior to everyone here. All the gratuitous insults about education and intelligence about people you really don't know as living, breathing human beings. I really think you are better than that.
Wow - must be a really slow news day. Why is this up here?
There is always at least one tool that has to say "slow news day eh?" and today it gets to be you. You know some days there is no news. But we still have to have somethjng to read you d bag. Also like to point out over 100 replys already not bad for a slow news day
Comments
Ah yes. I see your problem. Your photo has the sun too much for the left. You have to take a picture with the sun *BEHIND* you. Try again.
As it is right now, the vanishing point of the shadows are veeeeeery to the right. If you have your camera with you or something, please try again. Perhaps we can still teach someone here and this may not have been a total waste of time.
http://gallery.me.com/roberthuber/100876
Okay, explain why my shadow appears parallel to the pole shadow and all other shadows and Steve's shadow and the pole shadow are on radically different angles.
I would explain it, but for the fact that I don't know, and I honestly couldn't give a shit.
my final 2cp, because even a rotten bastard like me starts to feel bad kicking dogs this dumb.
basic perspective. start paying attention to the world around you. take an art class if you really just do not get it.
occam's razor. it makes goddamn sense.
Occam's Razor falls before a really good hoax.
Actually, I DID just take an art class and aced it.
Ironically, for the final we had to come up with a storyboard of sketches that told a story.
Include a person, something mechanical, something abstract, some other artist's style, something architectural... and draw part of it by non-traditional means.
The irony?
I used Steve Jobs holding an Apple, the iPod, the Apple Logo by Rob Janoff, 1 Infinite Loop, and the iPad.
I also cut a 2" wide Apple Logo from 1/4" thick steel with a plasma cutter and polished it.
BTW, the flaw with the wide-angle lens argument is the shadows of the power lines are pretty straight.
If it was a wide lens they'd curve a lot more as you go outward from center.
I would explain it, but for the fact that I don't know, and I honestly couldn't give a shit.
I can. But I need his assistance. Let me see if I can find a photo in the INTERNETZ.
Does someone know any photo gallery on the internetz? (Kidding heheh)
Not that much on the netz, but I didn't want to waste time
here see this example
http://www.sudiptashaw.com/photograp...ws-950x601.jpg
okay, notice the shadows on the floor. They are all "parallel" in the 3d universe. They are converging to a vanishing point to the right, as they should, in the perspective.
Yes, matrix you did. Except that it's all wrong. You don't need a "wide lens" to get that effect. You just need to be an average photographer and shoot the right direction with an average camera.
No, the vanishing point for shadow is so extreme I would think you need around 12-14 mm. for digital-size sensor to achieve that, which is no way that picture captured with that extreme wide angle.
Noticed the sun is actually to the right, or just behind, of photographer.
Or the pole is leaned. Problem solved.
Actually, I DID just take an art class and aced it.
Well I took a fucking architecture course and I was the best in class. Wanna compare dicks too?
It's all rather dismal really.
Did you read the entire story? It seems clear that this has been shown to be a fake image. It never happened. Or if it did, someone went to a lot of trouble to create a fake image to illustrate a true story. Doesn't seem logical.
I don't really care whether it's true or not.
My post that you were responding to was questioning some jerk who said that the waiter should be fired. Whether the photo is real or not, the waiter did exactly what he should have done.
dumb move by the restaurant's manager.
Exactly the opposite.
Let's say Jobs gets pi$$ed off. How much pizza could he buy, anyway? Instead, he has 100 people who got tables while Jobs didn't so they're all going to run to tell their friends that they're more important than Steve Jobs.
Plus you have a million people who see the article on the Internet and wonder about this restaurant that's so exclusive that even Steve Jobs can't get in - even though he wanted to.
Plus, the people who would have eaten there anyway get the message that "we treat everyone fairly here" which is never a bad message.
Absolutely nothing negative for the restaurant (of course, the whole story may not even be true, and even if true, the owner may not have known about it until later. In any event, he's undoubtedly happy).
No, the vanishing point for shadow is so extreme I would think you need around 12-14 mm. for digital-size sensor to achieve that, which is no way that picture captured with that extreme wide angle.
Noticed the sun is actually to the right, or just behind, of photographer.
Or the pole is leaned. Problem solved.
No. Again, the sun is VERY low, and the vanishing point of the sun's shadows is WITHIN the photograph. This is why people are having trouble with the picture, perhaps, because it's unusual for these circumstances to happen. But if the vanishing point is within the picture, all vertical shadows must converge to it, regardless of "wide angles". It's simple geometry stuff, and angles have no fucking nothing to do with it. Believe in me, I am probably the smartest geometric geek you'll ever encounter in the netz.
This is a great example of the pathetic power of the internet. A complete non-story on an internet site has managed to prompt 128 (and counting) comments relating to the authenticity of a photo included in said non-story.
It's all rather dismal really.
Dismal?
No, the truly abysmal part is when people who find it dismal not only cannot turn away, but feel compelled to post.
okay, notice the shadows on the floor. They are all "parallel" in the 3d universe. They are converging to a vanishing point to the right, as they should, in the perspective.
The only reason they appear to converge is that the poles that are casting them are not perpendicular. They are angled bridge trusses. Find a picture with vertical poles.
No. Again, the sun is VERY low, and the vanishing point of the sun's shadows is WITHIN the photograph. This is why people are having trouble with the picture, perhaps, because it's unusual for these circumstances to happen. But if the vanishing point is within the picture, all vertical shadows must converge to it, regardless of "wide angles". It's simple geometry stuff, and angles have no fucking nothing to do with it. Believe in me, I am probably the smartest geometric geek you'll ever encounter in the netz.
No you don't understand, and the picture you posted is no use either. The sun is in different direction.
The picture could be real for 2 things only: The pole is leaned, or the wall behind SJ is not parallel to the line of poles.
Well I took a fucking architecture course and I was the best in class. Wanna compare dicks too?
A bit curious, are you?
Why not lighten up a bit?
Jeez.
Or perhaps you are clearly dumb at these things. Please enlighten me where do you see any contradiction on the picture. You speak of "sharp" shadows. Probably you are comparing them with the shadows of the cables which are blurred. And then you really think you are "on to" something. But you are not. You are only witnessing the product of your ignorance. Go outside and see a shadow of any cable that is well above you, like 4,5 meters. Then compare to your shadow.
Oh, hello! Your shadow is now sharper than the cable's! OMG do you realise what that means? It means, you are not really you, you are a photoshopped person!!
No. I compared Steve's "shadow" with the shadow of the person to the left of the camera.
Since they are both standing on the same plane, their shadows should have the same degree of sharpness and darkness.
That power line is 20+ feet higher than their heads, of course the shadow it casts is fuzzy.
*What*?? Oh my God.
Okay, before I just make fun out of you, please enlighten me, what *exactly* are you talking about. By the "telephone pole" shadow you are meaning the red lighted big shadows on the left?
Because if you aren't and you are speaking of the 3 lines more to the center, than you are also dumb. Those lines are more or less horizontal, so their shadows do not have to align with the shadows of vertical objects... get it?
I was referring to the shadow that appears at about the middle of the left edge of the pic, and goes diagonally toward the upper right on the sidewalk. Two people in the background are stepping on it. I don't see the "red lighted" shadow you are referring to. I didn't mean the telephone lines themselves.
Just curious. Why are you so hostile to people who are just enjoying a normal discourse about this subject? It makes you seem as though you think you are superior to everyone here. All the gratuitous insults about education and intelligence about people you really don't know as living, breathing human beings. I really think you are better than that.
Wow - must be a really slow news day. Why is this up here?
There is always at least one tool that has to say "slow news day eh?" and today it gets to be you. You know some days there is no news. But we still have to have somethjng to read you d bag. Also like to point out over 100 replys already not bad for a slow news day