Actual photo or altered do you think?

[smoke665]

There are apps that will show you exactly where the sun & moon will rise in relationship to a pin on a map. One merely needs to marry up a date / time with a proper camera location. Will take less time than 5 minutes in PhotoShop.

All in the comfort of your own home.

I'm well aware of the apps, I use Photo Ephemeris, Sky Candy, Fotocast, Phototime, and others. However the OP said "Full moon over tower.....do you think this result was actually achieved with 1 shot using camera and telephoto lens, or the moon was photoshopped in after the fact?". The image (this result) is Photoshopped, no matter how many apps you use or how long you sit in wait, you won't duplicate THAT IMAGE. The apps give you everything from times, directions, color, etc., but there isn't an app that will tell you how large that moon/sun will be, nor is there any way I know of that can calculate the size of the moon or sun in relation to the building.

 

[480sparky]

..... but there isn't an app that will tell you how large that moon/sun will be, nor is there any way I know of that can calculate the size of the moon or sun in relation to the building.

The size of the moon can easily be calculated. Ephemerides will give you that. To figure out what the building will look like, one only needs to visit the site where you want to take the photo with a camera and lens. After that, it's simple math and waiting.

Still a long way from sitting for months and months.

 

[marshm-3]

It's sad when we can't trust a photo to tell the truth.

That is currently the case as regards digital use. Many if not most are manipulated so much that any semblance of the actual scene is rare. I know I will hear the tired "But ANSEL ADAMS manipulated his photos". Yes with dodging and other means that required skill and experience to enhance them to fit his taste. PHOTOSHOP and other methods render many scenes as grotesqueries that are difficult to view with the certainty that they are even close to reality.

 

[smoke665]

After that, it's simple math and waiting.

And it's still waiting, but the fact remains its irrelevant because the OP asked about a specific image not one similar. The image in question is PS

 

[480sparky]

And it's still waiting, but the fact remains its irrelevant because the OP asked about a specific image not one similar. The image in question is PS

Which still does not discount the fact that it could be taken in-camera.

Either way, I'm done arguing semantics. I don't care whether it's PSd or not.

Carry on.

 

[smoke665]

Semantics aside, since a few seemed to take issue with my earlier comment about waiting days/weeks/months to duplicate the OP's linked image, how about some facts instead? The closest full supermoon this year, capable of providing the large, bright moon in the image occurs on August 31st (just over 7 months). Apps report, they don't change lunar orbits.

 

[aussirose]

I'm with you Smoke. I zoomed in on the moon and saw the same aberrations around it. Yep, It's PS'd.

 

[cgw]

This shot is small beer compared to the weirdness AI brings to portraiture: floating heads, Barbie lookalikes, PS Liquify fails--cringeworthy.

 

[terri]

And it's still waiting, but the fact remains its irrelevant because the OP asked about a specific image not one similar. The image in question is PS

And it's one of those fun flyby posts where a new member drops a question, then never returns for the discussion.

 

[AlanKlein]

If 'the truth' is to create the intended image, then the means are not relevant. There's no law requiring all photographs to be SOOC.

You're playing with words. A deception is not a truth. It's a lie.

 

[SquarePeg]

Check out Kevin Tangy on Instagram to see what can be achieved with an app and a moon.

 

[snowbear]

Let's keep it civil, folks, or it gets locked.

For me, unless the photo is intended for forensic or scientific applications, it doesn't really matter.

 

[AlanKlein]

Let's keep it civil, folks, or it gets locked.

For me, unless the photo is intended for forensic or scientific applications, it doesn't really matter.

What about advertising, photojournalism, and travel magazines? Photography is a form of speech. If everyone is lying about things, how does that improve our relationships and strengthen our communities? How can you trust what anyone is saying?

 

[snowbear]

Ads and travel magazines are subjective and intended to persuade; not what I would classify as scientific. I can't count the times I see new stories carry photo credits to Getty or similar sites so the reporter/editor are relying on someone else's trustworthiness.

I think it comes down to the intended purpose.

 

[AlanKlein]

Ads and travel magazines are subjective and intended to persuade; not what I would classify as scientific. I can't count the times I see new stories carry photo credits to Getty or similar sites so the reporter/editor are relying on someone else's trustworthiness.

I think it comes down to the intended purpose.

I think it's important to address the most important part of my post. - "Photography is a form of speech. If everyone is lying about things, how does that improve our relationships and strengthen our communities? How can you trust what anyone is saying?"