Page 2 of 4
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:46 pm
by PB
But why would a macro lens make just the area under the insect sharp, and
make the foreground AND background blurry? As far as I know, no camera
lens can focus like that. I'm not saying the sharpness is fake, but rather the
strip at the bottom of the image should be as sharp as the bit in the middle
of the two yellow lines that I drew.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:53 pm
by Joakim Christiansen
I don't think it's fake.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:59 pm
by Derek
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:01 pm
by PB
Hehehe, well that shows how much I know!
Thanks for the link.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:49 pm
by thefool
Yeah DOF.
I knew it was possible to get it like that. I usually try to get such results with some photos.
However i still think it looks too fake. It really looks like CG, the backgrounds.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:09 pm
by Rook Zimbabwe
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIRST!
HAHA!!!
Nope no CGI, with a narrow depth of field it would look like that, low light and an wide open apeture would cause just that condition... if it IS a fake, it is a good one... (I have not blown it up PIXEL by PIXEL though... that would be the acid test!)
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:11 pm
by thefool
Rook Zimbabwe wrote:
Nope no CGI, with a narrow depth of field it would look like that, low light and an wide open apeture would cause just that condition... if it IS a fake, it is a good one... (I have not blown it up PIXEL by PIXEL though... that would be the acid test!)
Of course, but there are other factors. I think the backgrounds looks odd in some way. Really!
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:17 pm
by Rook Zimbabwe
I am just surprised that no one posed a Hoff Head on the Mantis Body!!!
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:25 pm
by thefool
Rook Zimbabwe wrote:I am just surprised that no one posed a Hoff Head on the Mantis Body!!!
shh he might hear you!
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:31 pm
by Dare
A: It is either a real mantis or a model/artwork. If the latter then that is more incredible than if it is the real thing.
B: If it is real then the photo had to be taken somewhere, so why not right where we see it? The mantis is the focal point of the picture and would be regardless of surrounds.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:35 pm
by thefool
Dare wrote:A: It is either a real mantis or a model/artwork. If the latter then that is more incredible than if it is the real thing.
B: If it is real then the photo had to be taken somewhere, so why not right where we see it? The mantis is the focal point of the picture and would be regardless of surrounds.
A) I have seen better CG though
B) what?? if the sourroundings look like CG what are the chances all is..?
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:40 pm
by Dare
Looks real to me, any size.
lol. Are we getting to a stage where models/artwork look more real than reality does?
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:43 pm
by thefool
Dare wrote:Looks real to me, any size.
lol. Are we getting to a stage where models/artwork look more real than reality does?
perhaps
Well if it looks real to you, what about opening your eyes?
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:48 pm
by Joakim Christiansen
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:59 pm
by JCV
That mantis is a good model.
