Taken at dawn this morning. Didn't need my alarm clock....a belled goat wandered by and woke me up!
This arch in NE Arizona spans 53 feet and rises 83 feet from its base. A truly magnificent span in a remote setting.
I think I'm finished 'crossing the border' now 'til winter. It's really starting to sizzle down there, and I encountered four road construction projects in a little over 100 miles.
Canon 5D2 w/17-40 lens @ 17mm (Thanks, Adam!)
1/2 sec. @ f16 ISO 100
Minimal 'developing' needed
To be clear, the second shot is a tongue in cheek poke at Art Wolfe's cut 'n' paste 'Full Moon inside Delicate Arch' cover photo of this month's OP magazine.
Posted by Jeff Hackett on July 7, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Awesome first image John! I knew immediately what your point was in the second. I saw that cover, laughed, and knew it defied the laws of physics. I guess it could have been possible if another anonymous photog was having a bonfire just out of the frame.
Thanks John, but your hints made it clear that #2 was doctored.
Also, there is just something about the moon that bothers me. You say it was sunrise and yet it looks to me like the moon is just rising. Specifically, the seas just appear to be in the wrong orientation for a setting moon, but maybe I am wrong.
That is one dramatic arch, and you treated it well. I knew what was going on with the 2nd one before I read the comment, excellent!
It sure would be nice if OP was more up front about it, or maybe Art forgot to mention his ability to enlarge a moon with a wide angle lens.
If you check-out Art's blog he states that this was a blended image (wide angle + telephoto) and that he passed the information to OP, but it was dropped somewhere on down the line. He also states that he ifinds it interesting how "exercised" people are with the blended image information not being there.
That's a real gem, John. Nice find! I can't believe you're ready to jump out of the desert southwest frying pan though!!
Interesting to hear the back story behind Art's image. While it was an obvious blend, OP should've disclosed it...if only to spare Art the crap he probably had to take!
Discussion
20 repliesThis arch in NE Arizona spans 53 feet and rises 83 feet from its base. A truly magnificent span in a remote setting.
I think I'm finished 'crossing the border' now 'til winter. It's really starting to sizzle down there, and I encountered four road construction projects in a little over 100 miles.
Canon 5D2 w/17-40 lens @ 17mm (Thanks, Adam!)
1/2 sec. @ f16 ISO 100
Minimal 'developing' needed
I'll take mine on rye, Art!!
I'm happy to see that you are enjoying the 17-40.
As for #2, interesting concept, but it just doesn't pass the test for me. These "double exposures" just cause the logic in me to scream in protest.
To be clear, the second shot is a tongue in cheek poke at Art Wolfe's cut 'n' paste 'Full Moon inside Delicate Arch' cover photo of this month's OP magazine.
Not to be taken seriously!
Also, there is just something about the moon that bothers me. You say it was sunrise and yet it looks to me like the moon is just rising. Specifically, the seas just appear to be in the wrong orientation for a setting moon, but maybe I am wrong.
Thanks for the laugh with #2.
It sure would be nice if OP was more up front about it, or maybe Art forgot to mention his ability to enlarge a moon with a wide angle lens.
If you check-out Art's blog he states that this was a blended image (wide angle + telephoto) and that he passed the information to OP, but it was dropped somewhere on down the line. He also states that he ifinds it interesting how "exercised" people are with the blended image information not being there.
The full quote reads:
"It’s amazing how exercised people get when they think you’re trying to put something over on them, but I’m the same way."
Interesting to hear the back story behind Art's image. While it was an obvious blend, OP should've disclosed it...if only to spare Art the crap he probably had to take!