Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
#61
Canon-F1 said:
they have lied to you so often that you don´t care anymore if someone is telling the truth or not... that is what you are saying?
Click to expand...

As you didn't get it, I'll try to restate my point more simply...
Truth is subjective. If you believe a ''straight' image directly from the camera is not manipulated then you are kidding yourself. Our choices of focal length, aperture and ISO all contribute to capturing how we 'see' an image.
Artistic photography, such as the image under discussion, is not about a truthful, faithful rendition of a scene, it is the capturing and presentation of a scene in the manner that the photographer choose. Keep the straight from the camera / no manipulation or it's 'cheating' for forensic photography in a court of law or for those poor souls who spend their creative time shooting lens charts.
I'd never heard of Peter Lik until I came across this thread. He seems to make some nice images. I don't care if it is seen by some as a cheat to be debunked (they must hate advertising photography and never shoot portraits or glamour - areas where telling that kind of 'truth' is enough to get you fired!) - it is a very fine image
 
Upvote 0
#62
I Like the shot as I said but can anyone explain at least how come the purple haze of our atmosphere is not in front of the moon? afterall if there was a cloud it would hardly be behind the moon?

Any ideas? would love to know how it was done.
 
Upvote 0
#63
Flake said:
Not true! You can with enough MP shoot the moon at 300mm all you need is the crop tool and magnify! You're making an assumption that no post processing has been done, and of course if that was the case you'd be right.
Click to expand...

why 300mm.. lets say 50mm. ;D

of course he could have cropped out the hell of the 5D image (not MK2 i guess). likely? i think not.
 
Upvote 0
#65
Octavian said:
I Like the shot as I said but can anyone explain at least how come the purple haze of our atmosphere is not in front of the moon? afterall if there was a cloud it would hardly be behind the moon?

Any ideas? would love to know how it was done.
Click to expand...

Its two shots merged together! The moon and the background were shot seperatley.
 
Upvote 0
#66
Canon-F1 said:
Patrickfoto said:
As you didn't get it, I'll try to restate my point more simply...
Click to expand...

well you don´t get it... it´s something different when i tell you im the king of england or if i make a picture from me wearing a crown.
Click to expand...

good point!

instead of saying "i pointed my lens at the moon, released the shutterr and bang.... i got this great image". he could be a bit more "honest" in how he "produced" this image.
 
Upvote 0
#68
Re: Just for fun! How did I do this????

5D Freak said:
I see a lot of people having a crack each way. Here's one of mine. This is a full 360 degree panorama done in the southern hemisphere. Star trails done with stars intact and real. Done with 17TS-E. 2hr Exposure. No fisheye used! To my knowedge, this is the first time a full 360 pano with star trails has ever been made without the use of a fisheye lens.
Click to expand...

This is an amazing shot, spectacular!

Did you mount the body on some kind of turntable that rotated over the 2 hours?? Excuse my ignorance, have no experience in this type of photography whatsoever :)
 
Upvote 0
#69
Gothmoth said:
good point!

instead of saying "i pointed my lens at the moon, released the shutterr and bang.... i got this great image". he could be a bit more "honest" in how he "produced" this image.
Click to expand...

exactly!

i can produce all kind of great images in post. fantastic landscapes never seen before.

but he makes it sound like it´s pure photographic excellence.
and he does it with purpose i think.

there is no word about doing heavy postprocessing on the image, blending two images etc. in the text below the image.

every serious landscape photograph will write that he used a ND filter to hold back the sky or uses image blending to get details in the sky. but this guy....

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.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#71
Gothmoth said:
4 postings and already 2 negative karma.. must be new record.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is. I have no idea how the karma scores work on a forum like this. I came to the site to research for an intended purchase and wandered into this discussion. It probably matters little in the great scheme of things.

I tend to stick up for anyone I see being treated unfairly - in this case the big bad Aussie photographer!
 
Upvote 0
#72
i don´t like it when photographer try to obscure that they have done editing.

if this image was a single exposure, as he made it sound, it would be a much better photograph. as an edited image it´s only average. still good looking but not so special.
 
Upvote 0
#74
Upvote 0
#75
CowGummy said:
I just read his biography, and holy smokes, he's made some serious cash including a single sale at $1,000,000:

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/01/13/australian-landscape-photographer-peter-lik-sells-photo-for-1-million/
Click to expand...
Yeah, and here's his backstory for that winning snap:

I will never forget this morning for the rest of my life. It was calm, and the scent of the fall forest filled my lungs. The mist cleared, and a magical reflection in the river briefly appeared. White birch trees, black trunks, a kaleidoscope of foliage combining to reveal an illusion of three dimensions. I pressed the shutter – once – and then the scene vanished with the morning breeze, never to be seen again.

In the light of recent discussions, I wonder whether the above actually translates to:

It was a cold morning and my head was banging after a night on the whisky with my mate. I sparked up a fag and fired up the computer to see whether I could coax a usable image out of anything from my last nature shoot. Bleary-eyed, I went into Photoshop, feeling about as inspired as a science student in a double-R.E. lesson on a wet winter Wednesday....

:)
 
Upvote 0
#76
Fleetie said:
CowGummy said:
I just read his biography, and holy smokes, he's made some serious cash including a single sale at $1,000,000:

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/01/13/australian-landscape-photographer-peter-lik-sells-photo-for-1-million/
Click to expand...
Yeah, and here's his backstory for that winning snap:

I will never forget this morning for the rest of my life. It was calm, and the scent of the fall forest filled my lungs. The mist cleared, and a magical reflection in the river briefly appeared. White birch trees, black trunks, a kaleidoscope of foliage combining to reveal an illusion of three dimensions. I pressed the shutter – once – and then the scene vanished with the morning breeze, never to be seen again.

In the light of recent discussions, I wonder whether the above actually translates to:

It was a cold morning and my head was banging after a night on the whisky with my mate. I sparked up a fag and fired up the computer to see whether I could coax a usable image out of anything from my last nature shoot. Bleary-eyed, I went into Photoshop, feeling about as inspired as a science student in a double-R.E. lesson on a wet winter Wednesday....

:)
Click to expand...

LOL! Cracked me up... Yeah, he does make it sound a bit like he was tripping on a particularly stale mushroom that particular morning...
 
Upvote 0
#78
Hi!

This photo is a collage for the following reasons:
1) The moon (one day after full moon) rises with the dark (not illuminated) side up also the most brilliant, rayed crater (Tycho) on the moon should be more towards the right. This leads to the clear conclusion that the picture of the moon was made when it was high in the sky and NOT on the horizon.
2) The nearly full moon is situated opposite to the sun direction. One does not see dawning or dusky horizons near to it but in exactly the opposite direction close to the sun.
3) The star field is several magnitudes weaker than the faint(!) part of the moon. It is impossible to capture this in a single exposure.
4) The starfield including the horizon seems to be taken at a much shorter focal lengths. I could not identify the constellations but one gets the impression that it includes some starclouds of the milky way. This would force the full moon being observed around december or June/July. During these months the (full) moon does not rise at 6:50pm.

If I would invest more time one could maybe find more weak points....

Franz (professional Astronomer and amateur photographer)
 
Upvote 0
#79
Fleetie said:
CowGummy said:
I just read his biography, and holy smokes, he's made some serious cash including a single sale at $1,000,000:

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/01/13/australian-landscape-photographer-peter-lik-sells-photo-for-1-million/
Click to expand...
Yeah, and here's his backstory for that winning snap:

I will never forget this morning for the rest of my life. It was calm, and the scent of the fall forest filled my lungs. The mist cleared, and a magical reflection in the river briefly appeared. White birch trees, black trunks, a kaleidoscope of foliage combining to reveal an illusion of three dimensions. I pressed the shutter – once – and then the scene vanished with the morning breeze, never to be seen again.

In the light of recent discussions, I wonder whether the above actually translates to:

It was a cold morning and my head was banging after a night on the whisky with my mate. I sparked up a fag and fired up the computer to see whether I could coax a usable image out of anything from my last nature shoot. Bleary-eyed, I went into Photoshop, feeling about as inspired as a science student in a double-R.E. lesson on a wet winter Wednesday....

:)
Click to expand...


LOL - but you also hit the nail on the head, it’s not the picture that is the issue I mean who hasn’t photoshop’d a photo by adding or removing detail. It’s the narrative that is so cringing which to me reflects on the photographers personality badly. Having said that I couldn’t have this pic on the wall the skyline would annoy the hell out of me.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
ROUND TWO - Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
Replies
29
Views
25K
arussarts
A
H
  • Locked
Truth in photography
Replies
26
Views
12K
wickidwombat
W
P
  • Locked
The next 5D: Someone posted this on Dpreview
Replies
16
Views
11K
Positron
P
R
  • Locked
ZEISS vs Nikon, a cute story - Canon comes into it......eventually
Replies
4
Views
4K
Noobiefied
N
T
  • Locked
70-200mm 2.8 IS mkii vignetting in the corner problem. Can someone help me?
Replies
34
Views
18K
bornshooter
B
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu