PDA

View Full Version : Dodgy Digital?


barryt
11-29-2005, 07:24 AM
I saw this photo in a magazine the other day. It was an article about the house. What struck me as dodgy was the reflection of the boat. Can you really see the top of a boat and the sunny side of the oars in the reflection? Methinks not! The house reflection seems a bit suspect too. Would you see any reflection of the house from this viewpoint?

The pictures are of course copyright.

maria_khurram
11-29-2005, 09:17 AM
Roflmaotid.....................:d

SaraD
11-29-2005, 09:29 AM
*LOL* Isnīt digital media the best! What you see is what you get.... or...?

Bytemebabs
11-29-2005, 01:30 PM
What am I missing? The reflections look abit odd, but there must be more to it for you people to be laughing so hard. I bet you are laughing even harder now at me lol.

barryt
11-29-2005, 02:08 PM
Babs, as I see it the 'reflection' is just the image of the boat flipped digitally. A real reflection looks up, so that it sees the underside of the boat and the underside of the oars. Thus the oars reflection would be dark and you would not be able to see inside the boat. And the reflection of the house starts at the house bottom, so that I don't think you would see any house in the water from where the vieewer is standing.

dcolb121
11-29-2005, 02:31 PM
I looked closely at both these pics. How one sees something depends on angle and distance. We don't know how far the camera was from the subject and how the final pic was cropped (if at all) and how high above the reflecting plane it was. The dingy appears pulled up on shore and we don't know how long it is or what the angle of attack is compared to the water. Same goes for the oars. How turned toward the viewer are they? I can see the rear seat in the boat but not in its reflection. As to the house, I think what we are seeing in the reflection is the second story window (determined by vertical spacers of the sill, the number of those members and their even spacing the thick side sills and a single cross member a little above center with no added windows above that cross member).

Of course, I could be totally wrong...there are QUITE a few of us out there who are VERY good phono manipulators...

Nuff said!!

:D

Don

TxAggieDarlin
11-29-2005, 03:27 PM
That boat just aint right!!! it has been turned upside down
I love it!!!! Great find

dcolb121
11-29-2005, 05:27 PM
I say if the boat has been turned upside down or mirrored, try doing it yourself. I mean this is the digi forum and we should all be pretty adept at it. Try doing a simple flip and see.

barryt
11-30-2005, 07:35 AM
I thought this might be interesting. I've flipped the image of the house from what I think is the horizon line. As you see, it doesn't come near the water. Is my thinking correct?


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/30-Nov-2005/70662-House_2.jpg

dcolb121
11-30-2005, 01:56 PM
What's the name of the house from the article (if it has one) and where is it located?

Chiers
11-30-2005, 02:37 PM
I could be wrong, but I have to agree with you Barry. On the house anyway and probably the boat. The house seems way to far back to be reflecting in the water. No matter what the angle the pic is taken at.

barryt
11-30-2005, 02:50 PM
What's the name of the house from the article (if it has one) and where is it located?
The house is Lawkland Hall way up in the Yorkshire hills in England. It was originally Elizabethan

barryt
11-30-2005, 04:09 PM
I say if the boat has been turned upside down or mirrored, try doing it yourself. I mean this is the digi forum and we should all be pretty adept at it. Try doing a simple flip and see.

See what you mean Don. It's not a simple flip! I'm working on it. Some distortion going on there.

jhercilia
11-30-2005, 08:14 PM
I agree with Barry. You shouldn't see the inside of the boat in that reflection. I also agree with Sherry in that the house is too far back to be reflected at all in the photo. This is obviously not a real picture.

dex
03-14-2006, 03:16 PM
[quote=barryt]I thought this might be interesting. I've flipped the image of the house from what I think is the horizon line. As you see, it doesn't come near the water. Is my thinking correct?[quote]

Hi barry,
It's a physical impossibility to see the inside of the boat,in the reflection,(no matter what angle it's taken at!)the only way to see the inside of the boat,in the reflection,is to turn boat upside down,(then you wouldn't see the bottom of the boat,in the reflection):D:.
dex
PS
thanx for the visit :thumbsup:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/30-Nov-2005/70662-House_2.jpg

wiscojaydub
03-14-2006, 03:27 PM
barry.. you can see the jaggedness of the edge of the boat reflecting on the water..it seem's unnatural.........

fugitive
03-14-2006, 04:09 PM
Prolly done by a female agent, as it's been tested that women don't have the visial acuman of men, like picturing Drafting Drawings, blown up, itc. Don't fight over it, women have lots of talents. Anyway the boat is not only improbable, it's downright IMPOSSIBLE.

captan
03-14-2006, 06:22 PM
I'm not too sure... Don Colbert is on to something.

First of all the boat. It's true that a boat with it's top plane parallell to the water would not show it's inside in the reflection, but is that boat horizontal? Maybe not. It's dragged up on shore. A body of water is a mirror right? You can test this yourself with a mirror (that you can hold in your hand) and some flat object, by holding the object in parallell to the mirrors surface - the reflection does not show the top side. But if you tilt the object you will eventually see the top side from the right angle.

Not the best example but compare with the reflections in this photo: http://www.willowgrace.com/blog/hello/77615/1024/IMG_0125-2005.09.05-21.59.38.jpg note the angle of the hills and how much of the "top" side of them which is seen.

Also the issue with this beeing photoshopped. It's not a simple mirrored image we are talking about as my tests below indicate:

Here I've only flipped the boat (left). Right one is the original. As you can see the effect is a lot more sophisticated.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Mar-2006/14313-boat1.jpg

I skew the boat abit to get a fairly close match to the original. However note the following: No matter how much you skew or distort the flipped image of the boat you can not get rid of the triangular shadow below the bow seat. Also the real image doesn't show much of the stern seat.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Mar-2006/14313-boat2.jpg

This does not prove it wasn't photoshopped. It just shows that if it was it was done by someone who knew what he was doing. And he must have painted on the image to get the right effect.

Then lets talk about the reflection of the house which is claimed should not be seen in the water. I'm a bit skeptical on this point as well.

The sketch below illustrates a few points:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Mar-2006/14313-suspect_reflections_in_water.jpg

First of all look at the angles in the image. The bank that leads up to the house appear to me as if it was completely flat and parrallell to the water plane, the angle where the ground and house meet is perpendicular. Nothing strange here? Well, consider the claim that a surface that lies in parallell to the water surface will not be seen in the reflection. That mean that the bank which streaches all the way to the hedge would not be seen in the reflection. In fact, it's contracted. However, stuff that is perpendicular to the plane and rise high enough just might show... (I've noted the corresponding reflections to where it's reflected from with symbols on the left side of the image) The dark reflection in the water is from the hedge (the x). Note how this coinsides with the cone shaped bushes on both sides of the gate.

My first reaction to the image was also that it was a fake but I'm not too sure anymore. The angle of the camera, the boat and the bank is the problem here, it's difficult to determine the right angles in this image, and that is what fools us.

edit: actually, the x is not the hedge it's some darker area above it... maybe.

Chiers
03-14-2006, 07:16 PM
That boat would have to be nearly standing vertical to reflect in the water that way. Clearly, it is not vertical. Also the house reflection shows the bottom set of windows and the top of that tall hedge/tree on the viewers left. It would be impossible to see that far away from the water. In my opinion, whoever maniped the image, goofed!

FunnyFace
03-14-2006, 11:38 PM
That boat would have to be nearly standing vertical to reflect in the water that way. Clearly, it is not vertical.

I'm sorry but this is plainly wrong. Just take a mirror, place your eye a couple of cm from the surface and take an object hold it at 10 degrees or so (to simulate the boat being on a slope). You'll notice you can see the top of your object compressed just as in the picture.

I think most people here are just a little confused over how reflections work.

*edit* Sorry, I saw Captan's post. He'd already explained it.

beautifulfreak
03-15-2006, 02:44 AM
I was kinda wondering if the whole dang boat was photoshopped in. The sun seems a tad too bright on the boat for the rest of the image. And the back of the boat is still in the water, shouldn't there be a bit more disturbance in the water around where the boat contacts the water? But whatever, that refletion is total bogus. But what do i know, i'm only a girl...grumble grumble grumble...acuman...smacuman. (is there a smiley to express this?) ;)

Chiers
03-15-2006, 04:09 AM
I'm sorry but this is plainly wrong. Just take a mirror, place your eye a couple of cm from the surface and take an object hold it at 10 degrees or so (to simulate the boat being on a slope). You'll notice you can see the top of your object compressed just as in the picture.

I think most people here are just a little confused over how reflections work.

*edit* Sorry, I saw Captan's post. He'd already explained it.


Lol, I guess we must agree to disagree.;)

barryt
03-15-2006, 05:47 AM
Thanks for all the new comments. I originally posted this in November. At first I thought it was a simple flip, though now we've shown that not to be so. In spite of all the talent here we still haven't come up with how it was done, and if the photographer was as skilled as he seems to have been, why make such an error?
I think the grass to our left of the boat was a simple clone job in PS too, it's got that repetitive look you get if you repeat clone a piece