Me, tenacious? OK, I'll wear that.. - I like it!
I do get a bit .. er.. terse.. when I see debate about stuff that is not testable or particularly relevant, like the photographer's intentions, mood,
shooting style, or what camera they picked up and what mode it was in..
For a set up shot with lots of time and where the photog knew what they wanted to capture, maybe... In this case, no.
Anyway, I tend to disagree with the 'expert' opinion about horizontal alignment, also. First up, if this is something being blown by the wind, which
way does the wind tend to go? Vertical
? So if the object is made of flexible material, eg plastic or paper or cloth or.. which way will that
material tend to 'spread'? Vertical
Now, *is* it horizontally aligned? Well, here's the best version I have of the area of interest, enlarged ridiculously.
NOTE - see all those little square pixels? They are there because this enlargement was done properly
, by simply enlarging the size of the
native pixels as the camera saved it. It is not
interpolated (which adds false detail), and it is not altered in any other way.
I've done my best to find where I think the actual leftmost and rightmost extremities of the 'thing' would be, and put little crosses on those points
- one could argue they could be slightly lower or higher, but I think I've been pretty fair. Now, is that line joining them horizontal? Obviously
not. And that is despite the fact that by the camera sensor's nature, and especially once combined with the jpeg compression used to save the
image, the resulting image will *always* have a false tendency towards slightly 'squared off' data, and lines that are slightly skewed towards
horizontal or vertical.
You can see
this effect quite obviously in the two circles I drew - note how the 'detail' (which is effectively
only resolved down to about the 3-5 pixel level) tends to be squared off and aligned vertically or horizontally - if you examine the entire image you
will see the same thing everywhere. All cameras do that when saving jpeg's, and cheaper smaller cameras do it worse because of the nature of their
Yet despite all that, it's clearly not precisely horizontal.. And if it was, given the conditions will tend to push it to horizontal, why would that
be highly significant? While we're on the topic, is it symmetrical
? Of course it isn't.
If the argument is about the 'thing' being centred in the 'sky area', well, I'm sorry, but it just isn't. I'm happy to provide some numbers on that
too, but imo this is just wasting time - people looking for any trivial, cherry-picked attribute of the image to point to fakery.
That approach is NOT a part of genuine investigation.
PS Ironically, I have plenty of time to do my 'bag tests' today, but it's currently overcast and raining heavily.. Sigh.
edit on 15-2-2013 by
CHRLZ because: (no reason given)