I'll Take The Camera He's Using, Thanks
Off topic (unless you consider the nine-year-old who swam around Alcatraz last year), but we had to share this awesome picture. Click through for the larger image.
June 22, 2007
- Email Us
- Have Your Say
- Submit A Story
- Our Favourites
- Licentious Phoenix
- The Unphotoshopped Photograph
- Swimwatch's Best Pools in the World
- Sporting Mercenary For Sale
- SwimWatch's Pool Guide
- Oh, I Never Read SwimWatch
- Select a Training Programme
- Seven Deadly Coaching Sins
- Swim Sites
- Timed Finals
- Olympics
- SwimInfo New Zealand
- CollegeSwimming
- Swimnews
- Swimming World Magazine
- Australian Swimming
- USA Swimming
- British Swimming
- SwimWatch 1.0
- New Zealand Swimming
- Other Suggestions
- Ciaran Norris
- Belgian Malinois Puppies
- Tom Critchlow
- Archives
- 11/5/06 - 11/12/06
- 11/12/06 - 11/19/06
- 11/19/06 - 11/26/06
- 11/26/06 - 12/3/06
- 12/3/06 - 12/10/06
- 12/10/06 - 12/17/06
- 12/17/06 - 12/24/06
- 12/24/06 - 12/31/06
- 12/31/06 - 1/7/07
- 1/7/07 - 1/14/07
- 1/21/07 - 1/28/07
- 1/28/07 - 2/4/07
- 2/4/07 - 2/11/07
- 2/11/07 - 2/18/07
- 2/18/07 - 2/25/07
- 3/4/07 - 3/11/07
- 3/18/07 - 3/25/07
- 4/1/07 - 4/8/07
- 4/15/07 - 4/22/07
- 4/22/07 - 4/29/07
- 5/6/07 - 5/13/07
- 5/13/07 - 5/20/07
- 5/20/07 - 5/27/07
- 5/27/07 - 6/3/07
- 6/3/07 - 6/10/07
- 6/10/07 - 6/17/07
- 6/17/07 - 6/24/07
- 6/24/07 - 7/1/07
- 7/8/07 - 7/15/07
- 7/15/07 - 7/22/07
- 7/22/07 - 7/29/07
- 7/29/07 - 8/5/07
- 8/12/07 - 8/19/07
- 8/19/07 - 8/26/07
- 8/26/07 - 9/2/07
- 9/2/07 - 9/9/07
- 9/9/07 - 9/16/07
- 9/16/07 - 9/23/07
- 9/23/07 - 9/30/07
- 9/30/07 - 10/7/07
- 10/7/07 - 10/14/07
- 10/14/07 - 10/21/07
- 10/21/07 - 10/28/07
- 10/28/07 - 11/4/07
- 11/4/07 - 11/11/07
- 11/11/07 - 11/18/07
- 11/18/07 - 11/25/07
- 12/2/07 - 12/9/07
- 12/23/07 - 12/30/07
- 1/13/08 - 1/20/08
- 1/20/08 - 1/27/08
- 1/27/08 - 2/3/08
- 2/3/08 - 2/10/08
- 2/10/08 - 2/17/08
- 2/17/08 - 2/24/08
- 2/24/08 - 3/2/08
- 3/2/08 - 3/9/08
- 3/9/08 - 3/16/08
- 3/16/08 - 3/23/08
- 3/30/08 - 4/6/08
- 5/4/08 - 5/11/08
- 5/11/08 - 5/18/08
58 Comments:
That's wicked awesome. Yeah, I'll take that camera too.
Did the kid swim around it? Or from the island to the city?
Heh, whatever. That's an amazing picture.
My car's mirrors have never been that clean!
Full disclosure: The window was open.
It's a nice picture, not particularly amazing, but nice. But I don't get the "I'll take the camera he's using" comment. It's who's behind the camera, not the camera itself, that makes for a good photograph. An analogy I read once was, "You don't say to a friend, after being served a wonderful meal, 'Wow, you must have really good pots!'"
While a freshman at CAL, John had an opportunity to swim the Tiburon Mile, which is a swim from Angel Island to the shores of Tiburon. He could tell you a little bit about the Bay.
It's an amazingly beautiful sight to behold!
KIA KAHA!
Mary
jimothy, good analogy! I never thought of it that way. As for who's behind the camera making a difference, this one was simply luck. He stuck the camera out the window when we were stopped at a traffic light, snapped the picture and we drove off. It was only later that we realised what a cool shot he'd taken.
Hmmm most pointless posting ever? Yeah I think so. Don't submit stuff like this to digg, you are wasting everyone's time.
Jimothy...what you said doesnt really make much sense. Yes, of course a photographer's skill plays a large part in a photo's quality. However, your cooking analogy doesnt really work. There is a huge differences between the technological differences between various cameras and the technological differences between pots.
Agree with previous poster.... waste
to the guy about not posting on digg: isn't the point off digg kinda "if enough people think its cool then it deserves to be here" ?
It's time to clean my car mirrors ;-)
Eliz
http://www.spaml.com
"Objects in mirror" is printed on the passenger mirror....tool
@ whoever said "Objects in mirror closer than they appear" is missing."
It's the driver side mirror. That mirror shows objects exactly as they appear.
just like the last post the "objects" warning is on the passenger side of the car. and since the picture was taken at a mirror, the camera is trying to focus at a distant object thats more than likely why the mirror rest of the frame is out of focus so, all you dis believes can stop calling every picture a photoshop until you have proof.
Wheres the camera? Hes taking a picture of a mirror!
Inside the car with the mirror angled!
HELLO??????? IS IT JUST ME WHO NOTICES THE 2 PEOPLE SEATED IN THE TOP RIGHT OF THE PHOTO?????????
@eric
It's a rear view mirror, it's tilted. You can't see the camera because it doesn't reflect straight back...if it would, the driver would see himself instead of what's behind him on the road.
Nice shot. Awesome Too Good?
This type of photo has been done to death
i think ill have a qauter pounder today from the big and prosperous MCdonald's as dinner today. (god i am so fat)
Couldn't agree more with last poster. For the life of me I can not figure out why this is getting dugg so high. Its not like this is innovative in any way! Go look in the digg comments at everyone posting google image search for rear view mirror pictures.
Screw the camera! I want mirrors that clear!
This is why the majority of Digg users are idiots. If they didnt' do it or don't agree its a fake. Get a life people. Very lucky, but nice shot. Cheers.
I'm a bit baffled about this image being so prominently featured on Digg. This is a simple snapshot. Nothing more. You might as well be going crazy over any other picture in your collection. It's strange.
We've all taken pictures into mirrors. Big deal. We've taken pictures at angles as to not include the camera in the shot. I just don't get the obviously inexperienced kids commenting above and claiming Photoshop whenever they can't conceive how to take a simple picture. It's pathetic. I've used Photoshop for 15 years. There's times where I need to put things together in software, but if can do it in camera, that's always best. If you look at photos and films from the years before computers, you'll find all sorts of creative and practical ways to pull off these effects. This simple mirror shot is just one of them.
It's not about the camera. It's about the eye. It's about noticing the angle. It's about being there at the right time. The camera's brand is nearly irrelevant. I've seen fantastic work from a cheap cameras and terrible work from expensive cameras.
If you don't like a cooking analogy, I'll use a better one for your small, disposable mind:
Think of the music made over the last decade or so. Some of the most sophisticated equipment ever created was used to craft and hone and perfect this music. Most people would agree the overall quality of music has declined in relation to technology's rise. Some of the most respected music in history was made without it.
No one cares what brand of guitar you use. That mentality is for suckers who think an expensive brand will allow you to play like a master. Talent and practice will get you there, not your credit card. It's the same with photography, you learn to see the angles, you learn lenses and how the meter works and anticipate problems and work around them.
This post has been removed by the author.
Nice picture...and nice camera too, I suppose :-)
lady behind is using an iPHONE
Haha, I love it that a retarded snapshot my husband took in 2005 got 1000 Diggs. Nope, it's not Photoshopped. It's a fluke. Put it through any Photoshop software you like - they only thing I added was a copyright, because that was the only way Chris would let me stick this on the Internet.
PS: Diggers, you are all completely retarded.
~J
I only have one question. What street was that one?
To be honest, the photographer was at the right place at the right time, because I lived in the Bay Area for more than 12 years and I know that 'Frisco doesn't get that clear very often.
I do believe that the image is very much real.
I implore all of you to prove that this is photoshopped. Aside from the copyright, this is completely original. I was in the car when this was taken and would not know how to create this with Photoshop if I tried. However, I don't know why I am trying to argue with Digg visitors. Drive to the top of that hill and you could take the same picture yourself. It wasn't hard.
Oh, and he's CLEARLY on a motorcycle people... look at the window he'd be looking through right next to the mirror.
Really people, first off, some of you should go back to school and retake English classes. Second While I have been working with Photoshop for more then 3 years now, I can tell this is indeed NOT photoshopped. First, look at the rails on the road. Now in case you were bad at Geometry, I will explain. By looking at the rails you can see from the ones on the road that if they were mirrored and tilted a little out to the left (where many people keep their rear view mirrors so they can actually see behind them) they have the same angle as the ones as the mirror. Also, for those that are saying its blurred at the edges, you obviously have never blurred anything in your life. If anything it looks like a white brush on the dissolve mode with the opacity set low (also makes a good fog layer if you use it in conjunction with Gaussian blur). My point is that while this picture could easily be photoshopped by anybody who actually knows what they are doing, it wasn't for the simple fact that if you went around googling pictures or even taking two separate pictures that you took yourself and splicing them together you would NEVER be able to achieve the same dimensions and angles that are witnessed in the rails in the road. Not to mention the actual downhill slope of the hill. Look at it and take it in. It all adds up. This picture is not a fake.
yup! i will buy his camera too
jenny
http://www.spaml.com
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
WHY WOULD this be Photoshoped?
If it was, you wouldn't know anyways. PLEASE don't try to prove it by saying stuff that has NOTHING to do with the picture being fake.
there are pictures that are real but look fake, and fake pictures that look real. EVEN with that software/program (fish picture that was cloned...)digg it
It's a cool pic. that's all.
I tried to find the reason this was dugg (object, person etc.) in the pic. but I guess there isn't one.
> Really people, first off, some of you should go back to school and retake English classes. Second While I have been working with Photoshop for more then...
More than...
This is a very, very nice pic, but was this photoshopped?
I don't understand, this is at most an average photograph, It's a picture taken in a f**king mirror, so what. Losers.
I love California! (street, that is)
Yep, it's a picture taking in a f*ing mirror. But you're the idiots who are Digging it.
Secondly, I didn't know we were on California street :) It was two years ago and we were just trying to avoid the trams, random UPS trucks and wandering bums. Got to love San Fran in the summer.
Am I the only one who doesn't see the excitement with this image? I don't see what the fuss about it is, regardless if its the person taking it or the camera he's using or perhaps even the lens he's using, big deal. Its s simple photo in a car's side mirror on a hill in San Francisco. Big deal.
This picture took me a while to realize what was so special about it. I was looking at that lady thinkingit was all about that lady in the car and thought to myself, what a lame picture. Then i read some comments and found out that its all a mirror. Execellent pic there my friend.
i see a white SUV about to get T-Boned by a trolley !
Cool PIC !
Photoshopped. Totally photoshopped.
If only replying to these "anonymous" Digg.com idiots meant anything. IT IS NOT PHOTOSHOPPED. The "photographer" is sitting right next to me, being all computer-retarded, as per usual. Neither of us would know how to photoshop anything, let along this.
It was a great trip, and a fluke photo. Quit saying it's fake, because it's not. It's just lucky.
... and by "let along", I meant "let alone." My typing ability is on par with my Photoshopping.
Not every Digg user is a douchebag.
Its a good photo and obviously not a Photoshop.
I love how these idiots love to post "This is lame".
If its so fucking lame, then why are you wasting your time fucking posting about it. Dickheads.
If other people like it, why do you care.
One thing is for sure no one gives a fuck what you think. If you can do better, post it on your own blog and STFU.
It's got 1838 Diggs right now, and none of those anonymous haters have so much as one testicle between them, so ignore them all.
It's a great pic, and yes, you must have had a good camera; a bad lens would have made that shot impossible. But it's a great shot and you should be proud. Cool stuff.
Nice picture, but...
Will it blend?
JK.
I'll say 22 aperture value on a nice camera?
I actually live in SF. The picture is on Hyde St. approaching Lombard. I love that area, beautiful view of the city, a great great place to take the parents for a ride around dusk. If they turned the camera about 90 degrees to the left, they'd get another great pic of the "crooked road" going down toward the Columbus area.
I actually live in SF. The picture is on Hyde St. approaching Lombard. I love that area, beautiful view of the city, a great great place to take the parents for a ride around dusk. If they turned the camera about 90 degrees to the left, they'd get another great pic of the "crooked road" going down toward the Columbus area.
22 aperture? Nice camera? Are you f-ing kidding? This was just an average pocket-style digital camera. Try learning a thing or two about cameras and lenses and you'll eventually learn about how a smaller lens and CCD size will result in greater depth of field. Try making a shallow depth of field with a pocket camera and you'll see what I mean.
Taken from a motorcycle? That's just too stupid for words. Man, that was a good laugh. Do you normally go around trying to look like an idiot? Do you miss taking the short bus to school?
I admit I found this post through Digg. I have often gotten the feeling the overall intelligence quotient of Digg was subpar. The comments here have done much to reinforce this feeling. And yes, spending this much time writing comments must mean that I too am not so bright.
If anyone else still insists here in the comments this was Photoshopped, they are an idiot and a troll.
screw the camera... give me the girl in the car behind!!
This picture is photoshopped. Seriously, something is wrong here. Look carefully. Look at the streets in this picture, and you'll immediately know why this picture is a fake. No homeless people! If this were a real picture of S.F. there would at least be....5 or so homeless in this picture. Good try man.
See the person who was driving in the car behind...she was heading toward the back of the mirror so the car that did this snap must be head to head with the other car. Is it possible as the traffic is moving? Hope you all see my point.
i just dugg (wink) this out from some old random folder
theshero.com/Backmirro.jpg
WOOT!
Shouldn't he have been driving the car, maybe?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
Home