Photo looks oversaturated and the color balance looks a bit too warm on my monitor using Firefox. Other than that it is spectacular!
Posted by Pam Colander on August 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Awesome image...looks a tad noisy though...never heard of him.
Posted by John De Bord on August 18, 2010 at 12:52 PM
There is something in that whole shot that just seem 'off' to me.....besides being noisy it also has dust spots in it. Lower part of the tornado, left side in the sky. But that foreground....it looks like it was 'dropped in' from another shot, the lighting doesn't look right on the shot. Hmmm, I will say though I love it!
Posted by Jim Bennett on August 18, 2010 at 1:09 PM
I remember seeing probably the same tornado a year or two ago live on the evening news. My guess is that the guy just grabbed the camera and shot on auto, then cropped it way down, which would probably explain the less than ideal results. In this case, I'll bet that luck was more of a factor than skill.
I got a shot of the same tornado only I was on the other side in the rain.
Posted by John Mumaw on August 18, 2010 at 7:39 PM
My sentiments exactly, John D.
It would take a whole lotta nerve to enter a Nat'l. Geo. photography contest with a doctored image. If this is real, then it may be the best tornado shot I've ever seen.
Thanks for posting the link, Don.
NIce capture, Michael.
That other one is phenomenal, Don.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on August 19, 2010 at 12:18 AM
There is something to MANY of the shots in that contest that seem off to me.
The egret shot, the tulip shot, the channel islands shot all feel like composites for some reason. The glacier shot feels like the cyan saturation was turned up to 200. But the Parker tornado shot seems fairly legit to me. The terrain looks right for the Parker/Elizabeth area.
Posted by John De Bord on August 19, 2010 at 1:29 AM
To those of you who all like work like this, severe weather shots (I LOVE them!) I would highly suggest you check out the work of Mike Hollingshead and his website "Extreme Instability". I have one of his prints on my wall....all i can say be prepared to be floored! http://www.extremeinstability.com/index.htm
---John
Posted by Pam Colander on August 19, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Wow John!!! Thanks for the link. How come this guy isn't winning Nat Geo contests? Storm shots are crazy and I have never seen such eagle behavior shots. The whole thing with the goose with the broken wing was incredible! I thought bald eagles were solitary feeders, not squabblers.
Man!!! Some of the images on the link John supplied are freakin awesome! Almost makes me wanna get some armor plating for the truck and chase storms next spring...almost.
Posted by Stan Rose on August 21, 2010 at 11:27 AM
Never heard of that guy--shot looks legit though, nice landspout.
Ive met MIke H. a few times, nice guy and the best storm photog IMO.
Discussion
12 replieshttp://www.nationalgeographic.com/energizer/vote/5/
Does anybody out there know the photographer?
Photo looks oversaturated and the color balance looks a bit too warm on my monitor using Firefox. Other than that it is spectacular!
It would take a whole lotta nerve to enter a Nat'l. Geo. photography contest with a doctored image. If this is real, then it may be the best tornado shot I've ever seen.
Thanks for posting the link, Don.
That other one is phenomenal, Don.
The egret shot, the tulip shot, the channel islands shot all feel like composites for some reason. The glacier shot feels like the cyan saturation was turned up to 200. But the Parker tornado shot seems fairly legit to me. The terrain looks right for the Parker/Elizabeth area.
---John
Ive met MIke H. a few times, nice guy and the best storm photog IMO.