I took this photo on monday and the back half of the dog is all messed up. i have hundreds of photos taken before and after this and they are all fine. my husbands theory is that this lady is evil. lol. but im hoping for a more technical answer. ;)
and as proof that the dog does indeed have a butt, here ya go. a back view. lol.
p.s. ive done nothing to the photo besides resize and save for web.
It's hard to tell for sure, but it looks to me like a bird is flying across the frame and happens to be in front of the dog when you pressed the shutter. The blur would be, of course, from the motion of the bird.
thanks guys. i thought bird too but then i wasnt sure since for one i never saw a bird but also because even where the bird isnt there some of the dog is still missing. but you guys all seems pretty darn sure so i believe ya! ;)
I thought this was a simple answer question too....until I took a closer look:
It appears that grass has replaced the area of the image where there should be dog butt. It's a rather square delineation, too.
I thought this was a simple answer question too....until I took a closer look:
It appears that grass has replaced the area of the image where there should be dog butt. It's a rather square delineation, too.
I thought this was a simple answer question too....until I took a closer look:
It appears that grass has replaced the area of the image where there should be dog butt. It's a rather square delineation, too.
yeah thats what i was talking about some of the dog is just gone. like cut in half. so odd.
now im concerned...
hmm.. too early to think what really happened. perhaps camera sensor was fooled somehow.
I was thinking this, too. Maybe the beat of the near wing of the bird fooled the sensor and it went for a close match?
(I know nothing about these things....where is GeneralE when you need him?)
ok well it wont let me upload the raw file. it acted like it was then froze and said invalid file type. if i convert it to jpg. just like i did for the one i posted and just dont resize it then how do i prove i didn't alter it??
ok well it wont let me upload the raw file. it acted like it was then froze and said invalid file type. if i convert it to jpg. just like i did for the one i posted and just dont resize it then how do i prove i didn't alter it??
Nobody really thinks you altered it. That was just a "challenge rules" joke. Very strange effect happening there for sure. I'm positive it's a bird, but I can't explain how that effect happened.
ok well it wont let me upload the raw file. it acted like it was then froze and said invalid file type. if i convert it to jpg. just like i did for the one i posted and just dont resize it then how do i prove i didn't alter it??
Nobody really thinks you altered it. That was just a "challenge rules" joke. Very strange effect happening there for sure. I'm positive it's a bird, but I can't explain how that effect happened.
R.
thanks for clearing that up. i was a bit worried. I dont want anyone to think i'm some psycho who would alter a photo and then say i didnt. you know?
I looked really closely at the coloring of the blown up version.
You will notice that the dog is sitting. You can see the slope of it's back going down.
The sharp line is not the dog! The sharp line is the leg of the woman behind.
You will notice that the sun is high, but not directly above. It is just off to her right and above. The left (her right) leg is in shadow. This creates the suggestion in our minds that her legs are grey or perhaps socked. In fact, it is shadow. The shadows has been extended because of the bag in her hand.
On the other hand, the right leg (her left) is raised in mid-stride. It has come out from directly underneath her and is now being lit by direct sunlight. If you look REALLY closely, you can see that her leg is VERY slightly lighter in color than the dog's fur. It is the line of her leg that creates the illusion of a sharp cutoff. The square of grass is therefore no illusion, just space between her calves (and the dog) where there is nothing blocking the view.
As to the bird, I wouldn't be too surprised if it had been in the bushes and had flitted faster than you could notice. It looks to me like it is a swallow... I don't know about there, but this is the perfect time of year for them. Around here, they are nesting and producing babies like mad... And there is PLENTY of food to keep their numbers strong and active...
I am actually a big fan of swallows because of their insane flight patterns. They can really move and turn on a dime... I've been trying to shoot one in mid-flight with my 80-200 and it's about impossible and a half.
I thought this was a simple answer question too....until I took a closer look:
It appears that grass has replaced the area of the image where there should be dog butt. It's a rather square delineation, too.
yeah thats what i was talking about some of the dog is just gone. like cut in half. so odd.
To me this looks as though the dog is sitting down and the straight vertical line, which seems to be the dog cut off rather abruptly is, in fact, the edge of the lady's leg. If you look very closely, it appears that the line of the dog's back is obscured by the sticking-out leaves and the colour of the lady's leg very closely matches that of the dog's fur, although you can just make out a small difference in colour. The illusion of a strange shape appearing is helped by the fact that the underside edge of the wing is near-horizontal and mostly obscures the hem of the skirt, and thus 'detaches' the lower part of the leg.
