|
meteoptic-l [ät] ursa.fi
message archive
This is meteoptic-l [ät] ursa.fi message archive.
Note, your can reply the messages on this page only if your
are already subscribed the list.
» To the end of the list/message
Thanks for your comments, Brian. Yes, I suppose the pillar is just a
little
to well-defined, as you say, as well as too uniform in color tone. The
image was shot using a digital camera and the rules of the photo contest
to
which it was submitted forbid any image manipulation beyond simple
brightening and sharpening.
My thanks go out to Les Cowley, too, who directed me to one of his sun
pillar photos for comparison.
Bev
- Included text from Brian Skiff dated 01:21 PM 1/29/2000 -0700:
> The optical effects in the imagr tyhat Bev Parks cites look to me
like
>faults in the scanning of the image. The pillar-like feature almost
>certainly results from the scanner getting fritzed by the image of the
Sun;
>it seems too well defined to be a lens flare, and altogether wrong for a
>real sun pillar. I am less certain about the coronal effect, but this
>could result from the scanner as well. I'm looking at it with an 8-bit
>monitor, so can't be certain.
> The photographer certainly used a very small f/stop, since the
depth
>of field in the image is about as wide as it can be.
>
>\Brian
|