by rubbertramp » Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:55 am
I also think it is fake. On extremely rare nights, I've been able to photograph the milky way on my 5D using ISO 1600, f2.8, and 30 sec exposures with a fisheye, and push the contrast around in photoshop to avoid startrails. It is possible to avoid startrails at that speed and focal length. But this is clearly not one image, because I can't see how that exposure time could've been matched, and this is an approximate 17mm view from in the alcove.
I also have a hard time believing you could image the milky way when there is that much moonlight out... Plus, it just looks really bizarre, the transitions between the sky and foreground look horrible. And, he said he used a flashlight to light the interior of the cave. A light as small as a flashlight would cast very distinct shadow edges. Only a big light source can cast very smooth shadow edges. I can't see how that alcove was lit by a flashlight. The light in the cave, according to the shadows, appears to be coming from outside the cave. Where exactly was his flashlight? Looks more like it is coming from the sky.
Candlestick butte is at least a few miles away from this alcove, and you can tell that it gets progressively more hazy the closer to the horizon, yet the sky is crisp all the way through.
Also, if you've ever been to false kiva, you know that you shouldn't step into the back of the alcove, because it is a cultural resource. He is clearly standing inside the part of the cave that still has structures in it, where there are signs that say not to enter. (this may have changed?) Note the rocks on the right that appear to make a wall, which he is clearly behind. You can stand between the two structures, but standing between the wall of the cave and the rock wall is frowned on, as is stepping inside the false kiva. Kind of disappointing to see this, though it is tempting to photographers because it is the only way to include the top of the alcove without a super wide angle lens or stitching multiple images.
Seems to me like he has told a tall tale. At the very least, if it is one single image, he has done some very poor processing to the image to enhance the contrast in the sky, perhaps accounting for the bizarre transitions between the sky and the ground.
I also think it is fake. On extremely rare nights, I've been able to photograph the milky way on my 5D using ISO 1600, f2.8, and 30 sec exposures with a fisheye, and push the contrast around in photoshop to avoid startrails. It is possible to avoid startrails at that speed and focal length. But this is clearly not one image, because I can't see how that exposure time could've been matched, and this is an approximate 17mm view from in the alcove.
I also have a hard time believing you could image the milky way when there is that much moonlight out... Plus, it just looks really bizarre, the transitions between the sky and foreground look horrible. And, he said he used a flashlight to light the interior of the cave. A light as small as a flashlight would cast very distinct shadow edges. Only a big light source can cast very smooth shadow edges. I can't see how that alcove was lit by a flashlight. The light in the cave, according to the shadows, appears to be coming from outside the cave. Where exactly was his flashlight? Looks more like it is coming from the sky.
Candlestick butte is at least a few miles away from this alcove, and you can tell that it gets progressively more hazy the closer to the horizon, yet the sky is crisp all the way through.
Also, if you've ever been to false kiva, you know that you shouldn't step into the back of the alcove, because it is a cultural resource. He is clearly standing inside the part of the cave that still has structures in it, where there are signs that say not to enter. (this may have changed?) Note the rocks on the right that appear to make a wall, which he is clearly behind. You can stand between the two structures, but standing between the wall of the cave and the rock wall is frowned on, as is stepping inside the false kiva. Kind of disappointing to see this, though it is tempting to photographers because it is the only way to include the top of the alcove without a super wide angle lens or stitching multiple images.
Seems to me like he has told a tall tale. At the very least, if it is one single image, he has done some very poor processing to the image to enhance the contrast in the sky, perhaps accounting for the bizarre transitions between the sky and the ground.