those varmints are sassy. My wife and I were at Moraine Lake last year and while we climbing to the top one ran over her shoes. He ran up the trail a little bit, stopped and then turned around as if to say "get out of my way slow pokes" before running away
Not really. The blur of everything but the squirrel is evenly distributed - from the rocks over the couple to the horizon, while the squirrel is tack sharp. Methinks that wouldn't occur usually; the rocks in the foreground should show more detail than the mountains in the bg; the effect in the shot is received when a blur is laid over the entire shot. Also looks like there are artefacts around the squirrel's fur. Judging by the shallow DOF of the overall image, the "edges" of the squirrel would have been OOF too. In addition, rarely amateur cameras set to autofocus would focus on the foreground in such a shot.
Not really. The blur of everything but the squirrel is evenly distributed - from the rocks over the couple to the horizon, while the squirrel is tack sharp. Methinks that wouldn't occur usually; the rocks in the foreground should show more detail than the mountains in the bg; the effect in the shot is received when a blur is laid over the entire shot. Also looks like there are artefacts around the squirrel's fur. Judging by the shallow DOF of the overall image, the "edges" of the squirrel would have been OOF too. In addition, rarely amateur cameras set to autofocus would focus on the foreground in such a shot.
Not 100% sure, though.
Well, if it's faked, they fooled National Geographic with it... As for the focus shift, that squirrel's head is right smack in the middle of the frame, so of course the focus grabbed there. Looks fine to me...
Not really. The blur of everything but the squirrel is evenly distributed - from the rocks over the couple to the horizon, while the squirrel is tack sharp. Methinks that wouldn't occur usually; the rocks in the foreground should show more detail than the mountains in the bg; the effect in the shot is received when a blur is laid over the entire shot. Also looks like there are artefacts around the squirrel's fur. Judging by the shallow DOF of the overall image, the "edges" of the squirrel would have been OOF too. In addition, rarely amateur cameras set to autofocus would focus on the foreground in such a shot.
Not 100% sure, though.
Well, if it's faked, they fooled National Geographic with it... As for the focus shift, that squirrel's head is right smack in the middle of the frame, so of course the focus grabbed there. Looks fine to me...
R.
If the camera was set to the center focal point. But who would do that when shooting themselves in front of a landscape and NOT sitting in the center?
Not really. The blur of everything but the squirrel is evenly distributed - from the rocks over the couple to the horizon, while the squirrel is tack sharp. Methinks that wouldn't occur usually; the rocks in the foreground should show more detail than the mountains in the bg; the effect in the shot is received when a blur is laid over the entire shot. Also looks like there are artefacts around the squirrel's fur. Judging by the shallow DOF of the overall image, the "edges" of the squirrel would have been OOF too. In addition, rarely amateur cameras set to autofocus would focus on the foreground in such a shot.
Not 100% sure, though.
Well, if it's faked, they fooled National Geographic with it... As for the focus shift, that squirrel's head is right smack in the middle of the frame, so of course the focus grabbed there. Looks fine to me...
R.
If the camera was set to the center focal point. But who would do that when shooting themselves in front of a landscape and NOT sitting in the center?
With a P & S camera you usually have no control over the focus point. The camera will pick the subject based on contrast and distance from the lens. Ground squirrel popped up at the right moment, click.
If the camera was set to the center focal point. But who would do that when shooting themselves in front of a landscape and NOT sitting in the center?
You don't have a choice, usually. And anyway they are far enough from the camera that they are IN the landscape. It would have worked fine if Mr. Squirrel hadn't paid his inquisitive business.
Sometimes it seems to me like we are so skeptical of images in here that we lose all sense of magic...
Sometimes the flash give the impression of a fake background, maybe the stones (close to the squirrel) are weird because of that.
Anyway, i had doubts about the focus too, but the important thing is the humor at this shot, and i believe it's real.
... Also looks like there are artefacts around the squirrel's fur...
always makes me laugh when someone calls out the "artefacts" on a picture on the web...if I remember correctly, images compressed for things such as the web usually will get the jaggies or other compression artifacts.
and if the camera was still trying to focus (like if you were using a remote) then it would have focused on the squirrel and not the tourist...if you used a self timer, it would have focused on the people when you started the timer.
Why can't we just accept that real surprises like this DO still happen.
...if you used a self timer, it would have focused on the people when you started the timer.
They said they were using a timer, not a remote - so the camera must have refocussed on the squirrel when the timer finished. Although on my camera it auto-focuses before starting the timer.
if you used a self timer, it would have focused on the people when you started the timer.
Not always- One of the few things I hate about my wifes Nikon P&S is that if you use the self time it always focuses right before taking the picture, not when you hit the button to start the self timer- frustrating but workable. We use our K100s on MF and the IR remote for our self portraits now.
if you used a self timer, it would have focused on the people when you started the timer.
Not always- One of the few things I hate about my wifes Nikon P&S is that if you use the self time it always focuses right before taking the picture, not when you hit the button to start the self timer- frustrating but workable. We use our K100s on MF and the IR remote for our self portraits now.
Ditto with my old Nikon P&S: it focused just before snapping, not when timer was turned on.
But the thing of it is, these people SAID in the story that the squirrel heard the cam focusing and popped up to inspect. Why on earth are ANY of us assuming they are lying? Gawdamighty!
But the thing of it is, these people SAID in the story that the squirrel heard the cam focusing and popped up to inspect. Why on earth are ANY of us assuming they are lying? Gawdamighty!
lol! - I just noticed the comments on the linked article has a bunch of people debating if it's 'shopped. It's a squirrel conspiracy.
For the record, DailyMail is NOTORIOUS for crappy shop jobs, so you should consider that. If you don't believe me, check this out:
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAD photoshopping article
