by MarkBour » Sun Mar 27, 2016 4:09 am
Wolf wrote:I am very certain of my hypothesis.
Here was my method . . .
Wolf, congratulations on your sleuthing skills! I could not have teased that street number from the image on APOD, at least not with my limited skills and tools. But when I looked at the other image you found and referenced (at the highest resolution there), I could clearly make out the number 2465. So then, that distinctive white-on-red sign, which should not be very common, and then the mailbox across the street from it, with what appears to be some sprayed-on graffiti of a word sort of like "Sassy", really seems to leave us with a match that could not be repeated anywhere. I think once you have those two items across the street from each other (and clearly the right kind of street), then you must have nailed it. I'm leaving out, though, the work you went through to get to the right spot on the right road, though, which was another fine piece of work.
geckzilla wrote:Wolf's right. It's also a good example of how funky telephoto lenses make things. It makes it look like that prominent farm house on the horizon is right next door when in reality it's quite a way down the road. And it makes what's a pretty flat road look like it's got a steep slope to it.
Geck, this sounds like an official pronouncement, and I'm assuming that you have the inside knowledge that it is correct.
I had to examine it further, but I
had come to the conclusion that the Wolf was correct.
The thing I was last struggling with, though (at least until I could read the 2465), was the building that I could not find anywhere. I eventually found a building that could match, clear down at 3357 Roscoe Road, about 3/4 of a mile away. It was a good lesson for me, Geck, a telephoto lens can indeed cause things that are hard to get, and (for me) even harder to describe. I mean, the house must have been there, on that line from Roland's vantage point, but why it shows up and other things did not is still partly mysterious to me. One factor, is that there is a farm with metal silos and roofs in the right position that it may have been reflecting a fair amount of sunlight back towards the photographer-facing wall of that house, giving it enough illumination to stand out well. A funny thing in Google maps for that house is that the overhead (Earth view) shows a building next to it, but when you switch to street view, the building vanishes. I wonder which image is the more recent, the overhead or side view.
[quote="Wolf"]I am [i]very[/i] certain of my hypothesis.
Here was my method . . .[/quote]
Wolf, congratulations on your sleuthing skills! I could not have teased that street number from the image on APOD, at least not with my limited skills and tools. But when I looked at the other image you found and referenced (at the highest resolution there), I could clearly make out the number 2465. So then, that distinctive white-on-red sign, which should not be very common, and then the mailbox across the street from it, with what appears to be some sprayed-on graffiti of a word sort of like "Sassy", really seems to leave us with a match that could not be repeated anywhere. I think once you have those two items across the street from each other (and clearly the right kind of street), then you must have nailed it. I'm leaving out, though, the work you went through to get to the right spot on the right road, though, which was another fine piece of work.
[quote="geckzilla"]Wolf's right. It's also a good example of how funky telephoto lenses make things. It makes it look like that prominent farm house on the horizon is right next door when in reality it's quite a way down the road. And it makes what's a pretty flat road look like it's got a steep slope to it.[/quote]
Geck, this sounds like an official pronouncement, and I'm assuming that you have the inside knowledge that it is correct.
I had to examine it further, but I [i]had[/i] come to the conclusion that the Wolf was correct.
The thing I was last struggling with, though (at least until I could read the 2465), was the building that I could not find anywhere. I eventually found a building that could match, clear down at 3357 Roscoe Road, about 3/4 of a mile away. It was a good lesson for me, Geck, a telephoto lens can indeed cause things that are hard to get, and (for me) even harder to describe. I mean, the house must have been there, on that line from Roland's vantage point, but why it shows up and other things did not is still partly mysterious to me. One factor, is that there is a farm with metal silos and roofs in the right position that it may have been reflecting a fair amount of sunlight back towards the photographer-facing wall of that house, giving it enough illumination to stand out well. A funny thing in Google maps for that house is that the overhead (Earth view) shows a building next to it, but when you switch to street view, the building vanishes. I wonder which image is the more recent, the overhead or side view.