Any photographers in here?

[FunkyBuddha]

oh yeah, it definitely is. look at the sun's position in the bottom part of the photo. Should be over the photographer's left shoulder and either directly overhead or behind him casting light directly on the scene. The planes are backlight from the right and above.

I don't know man. I tried to see if this was a fake or real photo online but couldn't find anything. Although a lot of sites did use this photo to showcase the flyover from LAX.

But if you look at the truck on the bottom of the picture, it matches the shadows and lighting of the planes. What you said was backlit, but look at the red pickup truck's passenger side to us and it's completely in shadow too. I think the sun was near or around the high noon position. When you see the sun's reflection from the windshieds of the cars, they don't give an accurate position since windshields are curved. Look at the black ASAP Tire truck as well. The back doors are in shadow while its driver side is in direct sunlight. Also if you look at the traffic lights and where they hang, the lighting matches with the shuttle and its planes.

If you say that the sun is over our left shoulder, and over him, then yes the whole scene would've been lit. I think the actual sun is above and just past the shuttle.

 

[sleeper3]

actually, now that I'm looking at it again, the best place to look is the poles that hold the traffic lights. They seem to have the same kind of lighting as the jets. also, the guy in the Jeep kind of looks like he is checking it out, although that might just be coincidence. Maybe it's real.

 

[sleeper3]

I don't know, it still just looks fake to me.

 

[JDM_Pro5]

That van appears to have a 45* windshield which would account for us seeing the sun being in or close to the high noon position. Looking at the red truck and the silver/white Jeep/suv behind it, the shadows elongate to the right putting the sun slightly to the left. The Michelin ASAP truck confirms this with the lit left side. Now, if you look at the light/shadows cast by Endeavor on the carrier's fuselage, they match the slight angle.

 

[JDM_Pro5]

Researched the trip to learn about possible low fly-overs and flight times. Turns out it was purposely making low pass overs to show it off for the last time before retiring to the museum

"Any time after 11:30 a.m., watch for flyovers of Endeavour passing regional landmarks such as its future home at the California Science Center, Columbia Memorial Space Center in Downey, Disneyland, The Getty Center, Griffith Observatory, Los Angeles City Hall, the Long Beach Aquarium of the Pacific, Malibu Beach, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, the Queen Mary, Universal Studios and Venice Beach, among others," NASA officials said.

Endeavour is expected to land at Los Angeles International Airport at 12:45 p.m. PDT (3:45 p.m. EDT/1945 GMT), and will be greeted with an official arrival ceremony before the shuttle is hoisted off its 747 carrier plane. The shuttle will wait at LAX until October to be transported to the California Science Center.

This picture was taken within an hour of noon, this above statement says it took off at 12:45pm

 

[JDM_Pro5]

I also used the Drollinger Building and the La Tigera street sign to find the location of this pic. It's at the intersection of La Tigera and W 89th Street making this picture facing south. if it was past noon the sun would be slightly to the west/right of the pic, meaning something is wrong.

 

[FlyinHawaiian]

The lighting looks okay to me too. The sun looks like its coming from ahead and very slightly to the left - I'm referencing the Shuttle's tailcone to the fuselage of the SCA - compared to the cars on the street. Considering the star-effect of the sun on the cars on the street, without looking at the EXIF file, I'd say the photo was taken at a relatively high f/stop to get the foreground and the fly-by in focus - also jiving with the rest of the picture.

I agree with you the photo was taken at the intersection of Sepulveda and Tijera, but looking at historical sunrise/sunset data official midday for LAX was 12:46pm. Considering the aircraft is not in any sort of final approach configuration at the time of the photo being taken, it was definitely during one of its many fly-bys over the area (aircraft on approach to land will configure to land no closer than 3-5 miles from touchdown). Even if it was the final fly-by before landing, it would have taken at least 10-15 minutes for it to circle back around for a final landing. I'd say the sun position being slightly before high-noon is consistent with the photo.

I'm sticking with its real - though as a photographer, its sad we even have to consider it might not be...

 

[JDM_Pro5]

Sorry to spark so much conversation with a picture and derail this thread. It was very nice talking about the legitimacy of the photo.

 

[sleeper3]

I love looking at lighting critically. it's one of my favorite things, and as photographers, we should all be able to do it. That way, if you see a photo you like, you can attempt to do something similar if the need arises.

 

[JDM_Pro5]

Here is one from my engagement session about 3 years ago to show awesome lighting. Photo credit: Elly's Photography

 

[FunkyBuddha]

For sure. I always study lighting whenever I look at a photographs. It's something, like Sleeper says, we should be able to decipher as photographers. It's interesting though, just listening and reading other people's takes.

I am pretty sure that photo's real too, like Flyin' says.

 

[JDM_Pro5]

Agreed, I take a scientific approach to everything and light falls right into that category. That picture I posted above was using a VagabondII powering a flash on a stand

 

[roy obanion]

Did I go too shallow on the DOF here?

Man, the 35 1.8 is a fun lens

 

[sleeper3]

Elephant Desolation by robertwsimpson, on Flickr

 

[subspeed6]

Last call for the Mazda RX-8 in Grand-Am racing.....

 

[subspeed6]

Here is one from my engagement session about 3 years ago to show awesome lighting. Photo credit: Elly's Photography

(picture)

Sorry but this looks fake as heck.

 

[JDM_Pro5]

It's not. I have more. Taken on a roof-top near sundown. Portable flash faced at us with sunlight behind us. No photo-manipulation, just editing.

Without flash

http://www.ellysphotography.com/

 

[The ManLaw]

Both of these pics are strait from my camera's. One from film(vivitar), the other digital (T3i). Neither have been touched at all. Which one looks better? Same dock, just taken a year and a half apart but the conditions were almost exactly the same sun and cloud wise.
Film:

steve10-R1-031-14 by sgardkam, on Flickr

Digital: (with UV and Yellow Y2 lenses attached)

080 by sgardkam, on Flickr

 

[719prottege]

i like the film one

 

[FlyinHawaiian]

The contrast in the film feels a bit deeper. I like that one better too