How was this shot taken

On 15 Nov 2013 11:55:47 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Alfred Molon:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17436...=1384458124309

I suspect the photographer took a burst of 11 images, then somehow
merged them in postprocessing. Or what's your opinion?

I think there are two alternative possible explanations. The spacing
between the birds may be a clue.

If this was the result of the straightforward overprinting of a
uniform series of shots taken with a conventional camera the spacing
between the bird images would get less as it slowed down for
landing.

Which, uh, is exactly what we see in the image. The first three shots are
further apart than the following shots. And when the bird has landed it
takes some larger strides which again increases speed. Here's some slow
motion of a flamnigo landing:

http://www.arkive.org/lesser-flaming...video-06c.html

I think it's quite obvious that it slows down for the landing and then
steps up speed after landing.

I thought the birds didn't increase speed but were getting their
running action up to speed so as to synchonise it with their movement
over the ground. Once they had achieved that they stopped flying and
started slowing down.

Not saying that this was done in-camera, but the spacing doesn't say either
way.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2013-11-15 22:27:13 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On 15 Nov 2013 11:55:47 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Alfred Molon:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17436...=1384458124309

I suspect the photographer took a burst of 11 images, then somehow
merged them in postprocessing. Or what's your opinion?

I think there are two alternative possible explanations. The spacing
between the birds may be a clue.

If this was the result of the straightforward overprinting of a
uniform series of shots taken with a conventional camera the spacing
between the bird images would get less as it slowed down for
landing.

Which, uh, is exactly what we see in the image. The first three shots are
further apart than the following shots. And when the bird has landed it
takes some larger strides which again increases speed. Here's some slow
motion of a flamnigo landing:

http://www.arkive.org/lesser-flaming...video-06c.html

I think it's quite obvious that it slows down for the landing and then
steps up speed after landing.

I thought the birds didn't increase speed but were getting their
running action up to speed so as to synchonise it with their movement
over the ground. Once they had achieved that they stopped flying and
started slowing down.

Naah! They extend their flaps to maintain lift as they approach stall
speed. As they cross the landing strip they flare to stall, touchdown,
and then maintain taxi speed for ground maneuvers.


Not saying that this was done in-camera, but the spacing doesn't say either
way.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 16 Nov 2013 11:10:41 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On 15 Nov 2013 11:51:02 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Savageduck:
Everything depends on the rules of the competition.

Are multi-exposures disqualified? If they are, how about HDR? Is
that permitted or not? HDR usually employs between 3 & 5
bracketed exposures.

Then, are there restrictions on the manner of post processing, are
there any restrictions stated in the rules? In your example, other
than having software which facilitates stacking and subsequent
flattening of the layers, it doesn't appear to be particularly
complicated and Photoshop should be able to handle that with ease.
An HDR would require more complexed processing.

Here is a similar idea found in 500px. https://db.tt/fbriXKtJ

Now that series of shots most definitely has displaced the fox
laterally each time. In real life the fox leaps up almost vertically
and comes down so steeply that they often tend to flip over onto
their back. Their is no way that a fox leaps in a long arc as the
series of photographs implies.

True, a fox most certainly can and do pounce from a distance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKAxEWSf3r0

But in the duck's link the fox is looking directly down in each frame,
meaning that it was more likely pouncing on an animal down in the snow
right in front of it. Also, the leap is a bit too long for your normal fox
who has strong hind legs, but that's a bit too far.

But in snow:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP15zlyra3c

This is the actual shot which we watched on TV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2SoGHFM18I
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:36:12 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-11-15 22:27:13 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On 15 Nov 2013 11:55:47 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Alfred Molon:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17436...=1384458124309

I suspect the photographer took a burst of 11 images, then somehow
merged them in postprocessing. Or what's your opinion?

I think there are two alternative possible explanations. The spacing
between the birds may be a clue.

If this was the result of the straightforward overprinting of a
uniform series of shots taken with a conventional camera the spacing
between the bird images would get less as it slowed down for
landing.

Which, uh, is exactly what we see in the image. The first three shots are
further apart than the following shots. And when the bird has landed it
takes some larger strides which again increases speed. Here's some slow
motion of a flamnigo landing:

http://www.arkive.org/lesser-flaming...video-06c.html

I think it's quite obvious that it slows down for the landing and then
steps up speed after landing.

I thought the birds didn't increase speed but were getting their
running action up to speed so as to synchonise it with their movement
over the ground. Once they had achieved that they stopped flying and
started slowing down.

Naah! They extend their flaps to maintain lift as they approach stall
speed. As they cross the landing strip they flare to stall, touchdown,
and then maintain taxi speed for ground maneuvers.

But they also spin up their gear as they approach touchdown.

Not saying that this was done in-camera, but the spacing doesn't say either
way.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 11/15/2013 11:36 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 06:31:56 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

snip


Well that way it wouldn't land flat on its beak, or tumble head over
landing gear. ;-)

One of the first things I learned when I first took flying lessons was
to bring the nose up in the landing process. Actually, what pilots do
is mimic the landing of some birds...nose up, flaps down.


No airplane looks like it is using the toilet, as it lands.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/heron%20with%20stick%20landing.jpg


--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ck%20landing.j
pg

Thats a great one. Here's my contribution- snow geese:

http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_1652cr.jpg

--
m-m
photo gallery:
http://mhmyers.com

On 2013-11-16 18:06:07 +0000, M-M said:

In article , PeterN
wrote:


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ck%20landing.j
pg

Thats a great one. Here's my contribution- snow geese:

http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_1652cr.jpg

Interesting, two different techniques. One using a traditional glide
slope - stall approach, and the other a STOL air brake drop-in.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 11/16/2013 1:06 PM, M-M wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ck%20landing.j
pg

Thats a great one. Here's my contribution- snow geese:

Thanks.


http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_1652cr.jpg


Nicely done. I like the glow of the light coming through the feathers,
and through the feet of the goose on the right.

--
PeterN

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Now that series of shots most definitely has displaced the fox
laterally each time. In real life the fox leaps up almost
vertically and comes down so steeply that they often tend to
flip over onto their back. Their is no way that a fox leaps in a
long arc as the series of photographs implies.

Sandman:
True, a fox most certainly can and do pounce from a distance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKAxEWSf3r0

But in the duck's link the fox is looking directly down in each
frame, meaning that it was more likely pouncing on an animal down
in the snow right in front of it. Also, the leap is a bit too long
for your normal fox who has strong hind legs, but that's a bit too
far.

But in snow:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP15zlyra3c

I'm not sure why your posts starts with the word "But" and then shows a
link that confirms what I just wrote.

--
Sandman[.net]

Sandman wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Now that series of shots most definitely has displaced the fox
laterally each time. In real life the fox leaps up almost
vertically and comes down so steeply that they often tend to
flip over onto their back. Their is no way that a fox leaps in a
long arc as the series of photographs implies.

Sandman:
True, a fox most certainly can and do pounce from a distance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKAxEWSf3r0

But in the duck's link the fox is looking directly down in each
frame, meaning that it was more likely pouncing on an animal down
in the snow right in front of it. Also, the leap is a bit too long
for your normal fox who has strong hind legs, but that's a bit too
far.

But in snow:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP15zlyra3c

I'm not sure why your posts starts with the word "But" and then shows a
link that confirms what I just wrote.

Did you *look* at both videos? In both, the fox is
looking down at a point "right in front of it", but
pounces on prey that is from a few feet (in snow) to
several feet away from it.

Remember that the fox is not *looking* at they prey, it
is *listening* to it.

In the sequence image the fox is almost certainly *not*
going to pounce on anything within two or three feet
just in front of it, but by the same token no fox is
going to leap as far as it appears to be doing in that
picture.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)