How can something so beautifull exist?

Dude111

This is just breath taking to look at




NOTE: The site i uploaded this picture to is a FILE HOSTING website which often gets abused by ppl uploading bad files.... I want to assure you if you get any warnings about this site,I UPLOADED THIS FILE INTO MY ACCOUNT AND ITS FINE! (You can disregard any warnings with stuff I post from jabry.com)

jonniebgood1

What do you like so much about the photo dude?

It doesnt do anything for me.

kelly1

It's a fine view no doubt but I don't like the horizon stuck bang in the middle and to me it feels like the foreground has been cropped out.

Dubwat

NOTE: the site i uploaded this picture to is a FILE HOSTING website which often gets abused by ppl uploading bad files...

Is it your photo? It looks like there's a © 2007 Jack Kennedy watermark in the bottom right corner...

Dude111

Yup there is buddy,i didnt wanna remove that because they did an excellent job on the photo and i want everyone to know who took it (I uploaded it there so excessive bandwidth wouldnt be used @ the site i found it at (1 of the places anyway))

jonniebgood1 wrote:

What do you like so much about the photo dude?

I guess the vastness of it,doesnt it just make you wonder HOW IN THIS UGLY WORLD that exists?? AND NATURALLY

DaireQuinlan

Dude111 wrote: »

I guess the vastness of it,doesnt it just make you wonder HOW IN THIS UGLY WORLD that exists?? AND NATURALLY

Erosion.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=erosion

partyatmygaff

Now there's a very well-taken shot of a beautiful landscape. Taken with a large format camera too so you can only imagine the level of detail the full size scan of the photo would have (Not one of my photos!).

magicbastarder

Dude111 wrote: »

Yup there is buddy,i didnt wanna remove that because they did an excellent job on the photo and i want everyone to know who took it (I uploaded it there so excessive bandwidth wouldnt be used @ the site i found it at (1 of the places anyway))

does the photographer know you're pimping his photo around?

Syferus

magicbastarder wrote: »

does the photographer know you're pimping his photo around?

Oh ffs, let's not start the whining contest that is copyright discussion on today of all days, eh?

He was excited by a photograph and wanted to share it with others. Sure, he's probably lost the run of himself but it's that very emotion that makes photography magical.

Dude111

magicbastarder wrote:

does the photographer know you're pimping his photo around?

I dunno buddy,do you think he would mind me sharing it??

I know if I took that I wouldnt care who was showing it!

davyjose

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Erosion.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=erosion

Am I doing it right?

DaireQuinlan

davyjose wrote: »

Am I doing it right?

No, not really.

stuar

Dude111 wrote: »

I guess the vastness of it,doesnt it just make you wonder HOW IN THIS UGLY WORLD that exists?? AND NATURALLY

Depends on the type of mountain....

How Mountains Are Formed

Many of the major mountain ranges are created when the Earth’s tectonic plates crash together.Because of the tremendous energies involved, the sides of the plates crumple like cars in a head-on collision.

The next way that mountains are formed is along fault lines. Blocks of Earth are uplifted and tilted over as two plates grind together.

Another way that mountains are formed is when magma from beneath the Earth’s surface is pushed up, but doesn’t actually crack through.

The final way to form a mountain is through erosion.

Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/29833/how-mountains-are-formed/#ixzz2G6Ta70ZF

davyjose

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

No, not really.

Ah so that makes both of us.

magicbastarder

Dude111 wrote: »

I dunno buddy,do you think he would mind me sharing it??

well, i'm not the person you should be asking.
but the very fact that he put a copyright notice on the image would lend me towards believing he would.

magicbastarder

Dude111 wrote: »

doesnt it just make you wonder HOW IN THIS UGLY WORLD that exists??

actually, this bit i found odd. i'd hardly describe the world as ugly.

brokenarms

Its a fantastic photo and a credit to the photographer.

Thanks for sharing it.

stuar

magicbastarder wrote: »

well, i'm not the person you should be asking.
but the very fact that he put a copyright notice on the image would lend me towards believing he would.

I think copyright notices are really for comercial use where somebody uses it to make money, if it's public it's public, if the photographer were that worried it wouldn't be on the net to begin with so I don't think he would really give a rats ass if it were simply shared, actually it would most likely please him that others found it worth spreading for non money making use, and the wider it's shared the more chance he has of actually making money from it.

EDIT:

And some just stick a copyright symbol on it to please themselve's and feel professional.............

DaireQuinlan

stuar wrote: »

I think copyright notices are really for comercial use where somebody uses it to make money, if it's public it's public, if the photographer were that worried it wouldn't be on the net to begin with so I don't think he would really give a rats ass if it were simply shared, actually it would most likely please him that others found it worth spreading for non money making use, and the wider it's shared the more chance he has of actually making money from it.

EDIT:

And some just stick a copyright symbol on it to please themselve's and feel professional.............

magicbastarder

stuar wrote: »

I think copyright notices are really for comercial use where somebody uses it to make money, if it's public it's public, if the photographer were that worried it wouldn't be on the net to begin with so I don't think he would really give a rats ass if it were simply shared, actually it would most likely please him that others found it worth spreading for non money making use, and the wider it's shared the more chance he has of actually making money from it.

EDIT:

And some just stick a copyright symbol on it to please themselve's and feel professional.............

hello, and welcome to the photography forum.

Promac

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

And potentially

stuar

magicbastarder wrote: »

hello, and welcome to the photography forum.

I've been here before....

whats the silly ani about?

have I offended anybody?????????????????????

stuar

Promac wrote: »

And potentially

I don't come here to fight, I have CT for that, just trying to give an honest opinion, thats all.......

And by the way yall I have 21 years experience as a photographer, developed B+W in a make shift darkroom, understood the Ansel Adams zone system before many of you were out of nappies, so.....................give me a cool animated graphic to look cooool....

Promac

stuar wrote: »

I don't come here to fight, I have CT for that, just trying to give an honest opinion, thats all.......

And by the way yall I have 21 years experience as a photographer, developed B+W in a make shift darkroom, understood the Ansel Adams zone system before many of you were out of nappies, so.....................give me a cool animated graphic to look cooool....

The "Hello and welcome" part was a way of saying "welcome to a discussion we've all had about 128 times each and probably don't have anything else to add". The popcorn was a way of saying "Agreed, but it'll probably get funny anyway so I'm gonna sit back and watch". The punch from the screen was me saying "Yeah and I'm sure someone'll get a mouthful before it's over too".

Feelgood

In fairness, tis not a bad photo.

Seeing the grand canyon for real is a major anti climax though. There are
potholes in Ireland that could offer the same experience.

Effects

stuar wrote: »

And by the way yall I have 21 years experience as a photographer, developed B+W in a make shift darkroom, understood the Ansel Adams zone system before many of you were out of nappies, so.....................give me a cool animated graphic to look cooool....

Sounds like you need to get up to speed with the technology. Black and white film doesn't work/exist anymore and it's all Canon or Nikon now. I've never seen a camera made by Ansel Adams.

artyeva

welcome to the photography forum, stuar

where snark rulez ok.

[don't mind them. they probably got coal in their stockings the other day.]

pitkan

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/mount-everest-captured-in-stunning-detail-with-twobillionpixel-interactive-image-3333593.html

Apologies for butting in but if this hasn't already been posted then an equally breath taking experience.

Flier

Feelgood wrote: »

In fairness, tis not a bad photo.

Seeing the grand canyon for real is a major anti climax though. There are
potholes in Ireland that could offer the same experience.

God I hope you're joking! I've been to the north rim in the snow, the south rim in the sun. I've flown over it, and hiked down into it and stayed overnight. It is truly awesome! I always feel that a photograph can't do it justice!

Dude111

No they cant but if it was taken good,it can let you kind of feel warmth for that area

Hugh_C

nasty looking HDR of an undoubtedly breathtaking view. I hate HDR.

Squeaky the Squirrel

42 of the World’s Most Beautiful Crater Lakes

Their ya go Dude.

davyjose

Hugh_C wrote: »

nasty looking HDR of an undoubtedly breathtaking view. I hate HDR.

Why? Honest question. Curious as to why so many feel so angry about it?

davyjose

stuar wrote: »

And by the way yall I have 21 years experience as a photographer, developed B+W in a make shift darkroom, understood the Ansel Adams zone system before many of you were out of nappies

Cristiano Ronaldo's Grandad knew the rules of soccer before his grandson. Your point?

stoneill

Effects wrote: »

Sounds like you need to get up to speed with the technology. Black and white film doesn't work/exist anymore and it's all Canon or Nikon now. I've never seen a camera made by Ansel Adams.

It does yeah - dark room skills still practices by a few photographers.
Anyone with a half decent digital is calling themselves a photographer without learning the skills of creating a photograph.
I've seen lads photoshop the bejasus out of images trying to make a half decent photo - I have also seen a few extremely talented photographers take a one go exceptional shot with 35mm film camera.
So getting up to speed with technology does not mean you are a better photographer.

brokenarms

davyjose wrote: »

Cristiano Ronaldo's Grandad knew the rules of soccer before his grandson. Your point?

I think his point is that he knows his trade . And was at it before and during the digital age.
Surly one person must respect experience on this forum?

DaireQuinlan

brokenarms wrote: »

I think his point is that he knows his trade . And was at it before and during the digital age.
Surly one person must respect experience on this forum?

I've always been more inclined toward the ideal of a meritocracy over a gerontocracy.

Hugh_C

davyjose wrote: »

Curious as to why so many feel so angry about it?

Personally, I have yet to see an HDR image which doesn't look completely over-saturated and false. Even on reasonably prestigious hosting and library sites, you come across ghastly representations of Nature which have arrived on this planet due to the use (and overuse) of HDR techniques, and while they may have a place on some people's photographic continuum, they're entirely distasteful to me.

Here's a fine example:

Sir Gallagher

Dude111 wrote: »

Yup there is buddy,i didnt wanna remove that because they did an excellent job on the photo and i want everyone to know who took it (I uploaded it there so excessive bandwidth wouldnt be used @ the site i found it at (1 of the places anyway))

I guess the vastness of it,doesnt it just make you wonder HOW IN THIS UGLY WORLD that exists?? AND NATURALLY

It's an amazing scene no doubt, there's so much natural beauty in this world and just as much ugliness. I love pictures which reflect the beauty of an ugly scene. So while i appreciate the aesthetic beauty of a good natural landscape usually it does nothing for me. I suppose it's all down to interpretation really.

This is beautiful to me..



Anyway, thanks for sharing Dude.

OldGoat

Hugh_C wrote: »

Personally, I have yet to see an HDR image which doesn't look completely over-saturated and false. Even on reasonably prestigious hosting and library sites, you come across ghastly representations of Nature which have arrived on this planet due to the use (and overuse) of HDR techniques, and while they may have a place on some people's photographic continuum, they're entirely distasteful to me.

Here's a fine example:

Does the photographer know you are posting his copyrighted picture all over the place?

Dude111

Sir Gallagher wrote:

This is beautiful to me..



Anyway, thanks for sharing Dude.

I dont know how beatifull it is seeing pollution going into the air,etc..........

And your welcome

Hugh_C

OldGoat wrote: »

Does the photographer know you are posting his copyrighted picture all over the place?

Dunno mate, I have linked back to wherever it came from so presumably I'm not infringing.

DaireQuinlan

Dude111 wrote: »

I dont know how beatifull it is seeing pollution going into the air,etc..........

Luckily it's all subjective at the end of the day. There's a strange beauty in these...



... even though they wouldn't be accounted conventionally 'beautiful'

Hugh_C

Your own Blair Witch Project Daire?

jpb1974

Dunno mate, I have linked back to wherever it came from so presumably I'm not infringing.

Didn't someone on the soccer forum hotlink to some boards member's photo on a 3rd party website (who had paid for the rights to use the photo) and all hell broke loose?

Or am I getting confused?

Effects

jpb1974 wrote: »

Didn't someone on the soccer forum hotlink to some boards member's photo on a 3rd party website (who had paid for the rights to use the photo) and all hell broke loose?

Or am I getting confused?

Sounds like boards alright.

Syferus

That was the PCPhoto fella that Andy Caroll gave a black/bruised eye iirc. That thread was mostly just people lampooning him for geting so uppity about someone using the photo in a thread about the subject, a young Irish soccer kid who was moving to Barcalona to join their academy.

Even if he was within his legal rights it was utterly ridiculous to humourlessly threaten suing a fellow poster as if he was some sort of organisation profiteering from his image. The reaction just reflected the surreality of the situation from what I saw. The 'hell' that broke loose was about the photographer's attitude rather than the original poster's use of the photo. We should really leave it at that or the mods will be tempted to go on lockdown after the Andy Caroll thread.

dirtyghettokid

***MOD NOTE***
in the words of that dublin lady -- ah heyor leave it ou!!

there's no point in dragging up this aul drity laundry again, so unless there's anything else to be said with regards to the OP, this thread has pretty much run it's course and may be locked.

please lets not drag up the pcphoto stuff again. doesn't really have a place in this thread.