April 21, 2014, 08:52:10 AM

Author Topic: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!  (Read 49733 times)

Gothmoth

  • Guest
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2012, 06:18:38 PM »
lol what kind of lens did he use?
i think it´s fake.

even with my astro teleskop i would not get this.

you can calculate what kind of lens you need to get this magnification but it´s late and im too lazy...

i think it was around 2500mm to fill a fullframe sensor.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 06:27:51 PM by Gothmoth »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2012, 06:18:38 PM »

Benighted

  • Guest
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2012, 06:25:57 PM »
That is just a impossible picture, in any way, sort or circumstance, the physics is just impossible...

The moon, well it could look like that if there was no atmosphere, but with an atmosphere with the moon that close to the horizon it would will be "squashed" by the refraction of the atmosphere itself (when you do astronomical calculations you have to take this into account as it amounts to quite a lot more than people expect (when the moon rises it is actually still below the horizon but the atmosphere bends the light that much that it appears above the horizon))... Well, there might not be an atmosphere then, well, the sky in the background proves there is an atmosphere, as the color and gradient of the colors would not exist without the scattering of the atmosphere... Also the moon is beyond the sky, that means the sky must be superimposed in front of the moon, so the dark rim would not be darker than the sky... Also, you can see some clouds on the sky, that don't carry on on the face of the moon...
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 06:28:55 PM by Benighted »

jfritz27

  • Guest
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2012, 06:26:21 PM »
Not sure if this went through, so I'll post again... in the run-up to this image's release, Lik and co. sent out an email to subscribers as a "save the date".  I copied the body of the email below.  It references this image as a "double exposure"... note the 2 specified exposures given about halfway down.


*******
Attention Collectors,

 

      Its HERE, Peter Lik’s newest release! He has captured another perfect photograph that up until now had only imagined in his dreams!

 

This shot is incredible, different and truly one of a kind.  Due to the advances in equipment and Pete’s quest to always be on the cutting edge., this piece may be considered the best “Night Shot” of Pete’s career. Let us know what you think.

 

Here is a description of the shot since the actual image will not be available until Tuesday 11/15/11.

 

This is a 4x5 horizontal style shot.  It is one of the coolest shots of the moon I have ever seen.  The moon covers 75% of the shot, and is perfectly exposed to capture all the details, every crater and line, the texture of the moonscape.  It really is cool!  On the conference call, the directors of the galleries really did go nuts when they saw it.  The foreground is a silhouette of the Basin State Park, with a  petrified tree partially in front of the moon.  Several of the limbs of the Tree are the silhouette in front of the moon.  This is a VERY unique shot, Pete doesn’t have anything like this.  He used a huge 800mm lens to capture a double exposure of the foreground and moon, so surreal!

 

Bella Luna

Kodachrome Basin State Park, Utah

+ Camera Canon EOS 5D

+ Exposures f/11 @ 1/250 second and f/2.8 @ 20 seconds

+ Time 6:50P

+ Edition Size 950 Limited; 45 Artist Proof

This shot has eluded me my entire photographic career. I have spent years trying to perfect this

image, there are so many variables you don’t even think about. It’s a really touchy image, but when it all

lines up, the result is out of this world… literally. I have drawer full of transparencies that I have shot

over decades that just didn’t cut it. I tried all the variables; different lenses, exposures, compositions,

times, then much to my frustration the results back from the lab were always disappointing.

The remoteness of Kadachrome Basin in Utah was an obvious choice to finally nail this elusive

image; remote, clean air, and a selection of cliff tops to shoot from. I had been watching the

phase of the moon and tonight the moon was close to full. I had a specific composition in my

mind and I searched for days to line up this classic tree with the moon. Tonight I hope it all comes

together. It was a long night but I knew at some point my perseverance would be rewarded.

I was white knuckled as I set up the mammoth lens, filling the viewfinder with this balanced scene,

the tree framed amongst the rocks and the low lying clouds added to the tension… this had to

work. The desert silence was stunning, my pulse raced, I could hear the blood running through my

veins. Then, I saw the horizon starting to glow. The golden sphere slowly rose in front of me. I was

totally stunned. I couldn’t believe it. So connected to this lunar giant that I was trembling. Such

an impact on my life. I pressed the shutter, a feeling I’ll never forget. The moon, tree, and earth.

I hope to share with you this amazing connection I had on this special evening

with the moon, that affects our lives. It certainly affected mine.

-Peter Lik

Fleetie

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #18 on: January 30, 2012, 06:30:11 PM »
That is just a impossible picture, in any way, sort or circumstance, the physics is just impossible...

The moon, well it could look like that if there was no atmosphere, but with an atmosphere with the moon that close to the horizon it would will be "squashed" by the refraction of the atmosphere itself (when you do astronomical calculations you have to take this into account as it amounts to quite a lot more than people expect (when the moon rises it is actually still below the horizon but the atmosphere bends the light that much that it appears above the horizon))... Well, there might not be an atmosphere then, well, the sky in the background proves there is an atmosphere, as the color and gradient of the colors would not exist without the scattering of the atmosphere... Also the moon is beyond the sky, that means the sky must be superimposed in front of the moon, so the dark rim would not be darker than the sky... Also, you can see some clouds on the sky, that don't carry on on the face of the moon...

100% bang on, in my opinion. Especially the bit about the Moon's dark edge shouldn't look DARKER than the surrounding sky. That is the nail in the coffin.
Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

lbloom

  • Guest
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #19 on: January 30, 2012, 06:33:10 PM »
Double exposure explains it. With the right lens and the right angle, at the right time, at the right distance from the tree, this is a reasonable shot based on my experience with moon shots. But still, double exposure.

Gothmoth

  • Guest
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #20 on: January 30, 2012, 06:34:56 PM »
800mm lens.. this clarity.. and atmposphere behind the moon.. yeah....  ::)

he either used a 2x converter on his 5D or he cropped.
the size of the moon does not change when it´s near the horizont, he only appears bigger to our brain... but not cameras.

so 800mm would never produce such a big moon.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 06:38:09 PM by Gothmoth »

Dianoda

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2012, 06:54:19 PM »
He used a huge 800mm lens to capture a double exposure of the foreground and moon, so surreal!

Bella Luna

Kodachrome Basin State Park, Utah

+ Camera Canon EOS 5D

+ Exposures f/11 @ 1/250 second and f/2.8 @ 20 seconds

+ Time 6:50P

+ Edition Size 950 Limited; 45 Artist Proof

I'd like to see a picture of that 800mm f/2.8 lens...
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 06:55:50 PM by Dianoda »
Current Kit: Some cameras and a bunch of lenses, maybe even a tripod or two

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2012, 06:54:19 PM »

Fleetie

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2012, 06:58:45 PM »
He used a huge 800mm lens to capture a double exposure of the foreground and moon, so surreal!

Bella Luna

Kodachrome Basin State Park, Utah

+ Camera Canon EOS 5D
+ Exposures f/11 @ 1/250 second and f/2.8 @ 20 seconds  <---------------------

+ Time 6:50P

+ Edition Size 950 Limited; 45 Artist Proof

Eh?!

I loaded that page earlier this evening and I still have the browser tab open. On MY tab,
the photo description does NOT admit or claim to have used 2 exposures!

Here's what MY version of it from earlier this evening says:

------

Bella Luna

Kodachrome Basin State Park, Utah

+ Camera Canon EOS 5D
+ Time 6:50P
+ Edition Size 950 Limited; 45 Artist Proof

This shot has eluded me my entire photographic career. [...]

------

Weird!
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 07:02:24 PM by Fleetie »
Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

LetTheRightLensIn

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2987
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2012, 07:05:23 PM »
Too bad the tiny little tree on the horizon wasn't just a touch taller, the moon appears to overlap and block out a small tree behind it, but the tree seems like it might just barely be short enough that it's top might have just gotten mixed into the dark edge of the moon so perhaps the tree is in front as it should be, hard to tell, if it were just a touch taller it might have been clearly blocked by the moon (i.e. fake) but it seems like it's not quite.

Anyway it's generally best to believe the photo taker until you have 100% utterly solid proof.

It certainly seems like it had to have been double exposure blended or something, extreme one shot HDR or something, although nothing wrong with exposure blendings, it can often be truer to life, if anything. Then again in his description he makes it sound like a single shot, but suppose that would be but a small lie, although why he feels the need to talk about a single snap with hands trembling.... Something does looking insanely crisp about it all. It is a little odd the way he describes the timing of it and the rise and beginning glow though, not sure what to make of that.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 08:55:59 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1343
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #24 on: January 30, 2012, 07:05:35 PM »
Why the need to "debunk" whatever story he has to tell.

He produced a good image, and he has prints for sale.

I can tell you that if I were to produce an image that good, I wouldn't tell anyone how I did it. I'd have you running all over creation chasing the tales I told about it. But I sure wouldn't give you the truth.

The guy gave us a wonderful visual image -- more than we deserve. He owes me nothing.

There's nothing else to it for me.
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

Dianoda

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2012, 07:09:41 PM »

Eh?!

I loaded that page earlier this evening and I still have the browser tab open. On MY tab,
the photo description does NOT admit or claim to have used 2 exposures!

Weird!

That quote was from an earlier post (reply #18) regarding an email sent out leading up to the release of the image.  The description in the email is different compared Lik's description of the photo on his site.
Current Kit: Some cameras and a bunch of lenses, maybe even a tripod or two

Fleetie

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2012, 07:12:33 PM »

Eh?!

I loaded that page earlier this evening and I still have the browser tab open. On MY tab,
the photo description does NOT admit or claim to have used 2 exposures!

Weird!

That quote was from an earlier post (reply #18) regarding an email sent out leading up to the release of the image.  The description in the email is different compared Lik's description of the photo on his site.

Ah, right; thanks.
Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

Z

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 188
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2012, 07:16:40 PM »
Although no doubt a technical masterpiece, the shot does very little for my personal tastes.

Good for him if he's pleased with it, we should all be aiming to be happy with our work. But to me, it looks like it belongs in a video game.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2012, 07:16:40 PM »

Fleetie

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #28 on: January 30, 2012, 07:22:07 PM »
Although no doubt a technical masterpiece, the shot does very little for my personal tastes.

Good for him if he's pleased with it, we should all be aiming to be happy with our work. But to me, it looks like it belongs in a video game.

It does have "Athena poster from the late 1980s" written all over it.

It just needs a baying wolf standing on the rock in front of the Moon.

But I still think it does what it does quite well. But it's more fantasy art than realistic photography. But in a good way.

Personally I don't do anything in post at all to my images, but that's just my personal thing.

The picture has inspired some interesting discussion, apart from anything else!
Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3254
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2012, 07:37:02 PM »
As someone who shoots the moon frequently, and has for several years, I feel I can say with confidence that there is no way that is a single-exposure shot. If the previous comments including an explanation of the exposure are correct, then this is definitely a composite shot of two exposures...one of the moon in isolation, and one of the landscape. I think that can be proven as well.

First, some of the soft stuff. Even with an 800mm lens, I don't believe it would be possible to get this particular perspective right. For one, even at a narrower aperture like f/11 (which is unlikely, given the brightness of the moon, its rate of motion across the sky, etc....indicating the f/2.8 aperture would have had to have been used), the DOF on an 800mm f/2.8 lens is going to be really, really thin...I don't see any logical way one could expose the scene THAT unbelievably sharp with the infinite depth of field that would be necessary to expose the moon with such stupendous clarity without blurring the foreground to some degree. Second, I've shot the moon plenty with 400mm, and I don't think that its ever been large enough in the frame to indicate that an 800mm lens would produce a nearly frame-filling image, especially with that amount of sharpness and clarity (accounting for camera shake, optical aberrations at f/2.8, even factoring in the quadruple mag. for double focal length rule). The fact that its all super crisp tweaks my "Fishy!" sensor just a bit too much.

What really seals the coffin shut, though, is the blatant oversight of the background sky. There are clearly visible clouds near the pinkish horizon that are NOT visible in FRONT of the moon. These clouds are even mentioned in the narrative! That tripped my "Bogus!!" sensor hard. The way the photographer wrote his little narrative, he certainly made it sound like the photo was a single-shot composition that literally took him a lifetime to achieve (emphasis added):

Quote
The golden sphere slowly rose in front of me. I was totally stunned. I couldn't believe it. So connected to this lunar giant that I was trembling. Such an impact on my life. I pressed the shutter, a feeling I'll never forget. The moon, tree, and earth.

The mysterious white-knuckling lens is never actually identified (and an 800mm f/2.8 lens, if it exists, would probably need a small CRANE to mount onto the largest, sturdiest mount known in all the lore of photography, no amount of single-handed white-knuckling would move such a monstrosity). The details are overlooked. The whole narrative and the concept in generally really tweak me the wrong way. I'm not really sure what the photographer is trying to do here, however it really seems like he is purposefully, but badly, trying to lie to his potential (and sadly naive) customers for this shot that SCREAMS:

FAAAAKE!!
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2012, 07:37:02 PM »