Still Waters Posted August 9, 2013 #1 Share Posted August 9, 2013 A quick glance at these pictures might have people believing they are the results of the latest set of wildlife close-ups - photographers using macro lenses to capture flowers in all their colourful glory. But they are, in fact, the results of time-exposure photography and are not flowers at all - rather they are the violent and awe-inspiring bursts of colour from exploding fireworks. http://www.dailymail...ke-flowers.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kannin Posted August 9, 2013 #2 Share Posted August 9, 2013 beautiful......nuff said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted August 9, 2013 #3 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Interesting shots, but I have some issues with the DailyFail's comments.. they are the violent and awe-inspiring bursts of colour from exploding fireworks. That implies that this is real detail, but it isn't. It's bokeh. Photographer Alan Sailer captures the moment a firework detonates in the air. His use of long-exposure shutter speeds creates the illusion that the light show is actually a red flower To quote the cat - No-no-no-no-no. If he was capturing that 'moment', it would all be emanating from one point - clearly these are taken well after the initial bang.. And it is not the long exposure that creates the key effect. In general terms, any photographer will always use a long exposure to shoot fireworks. The difference here is that he is deliberately defocusing the lens during the exposure - so all that much expanded stuff is not real detail, it is bokeh - the nature of that 'fuzz' is dependent on the lens design, the aperture blade design, the aperture setting, the focal length and just how much out of focus it is, as the bright spot of the actual firework moves through the field of view.. Change any of those, and you change the 'detail'. So it is not a new way to analyse fireworks as the article seems to imply. So... offer a glimpse into the split-second beauty contained in fireworks No, they do not. But pretty - don't get me wrong.. I'm just a stickler for getting the explanation right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted August 10, 2013 #4 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Very impressive... I would have never guessed they were fire works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d e v i c e Posted August 10, 2013 #5 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Very good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now