> I'd put money on image #13 being a fake.
>
Then here's another fake for you (the Vancouver photoshoppers are
obviously working overtime):
http://www.vancouver2010.com/img/00/28/88/96944586-10_62imgGalBig-Nn.jpg
FWIW, the front edge of the television camera is peeking into the top of
the frame just to the left of the scoreboard, as in the example you say is
faked.
The camera array in the rear of the goal is clearly visible in these
images (unless you think they've been photoshopped as well):
http://www.vancouver2010.com/img/00/28/82/96931366_12imgGalBig-VG.jpg
and
http://www.vancouver2010.com/img/00/28/82/96930103_20imgGalBig-KF.jpg
> Since when are cameras found at the back of and inside the goal netting at an
> ice hockey game?
>
Since forever. An integral part of the modern hockey telecast.
>
> My take ........... a fancy bit of Photoshopping.
>
> Also, the photo is just too perfect .......... consider the depth of field
> from the logo on the puck to the far end boards
>
Look at the image. *Really* look at the image. *Really*, *really* look at
the image (emphasis on *really examining* the image because this isn't the
first time you've declared something real a fake instead).
Consider the image was taken with a short focal length lens (a "full
frame" fisheye, check out that barrel distortion) under bright television
lighting over a huge, highly reflective ice surface, a small aperture, and
you have the ingredients for serious depth of field.
jim
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
