Fire Rainbow

PNA · Jul 27, 2006

Mod: Can I post this.....A friend sent this shot to me with an explaination.

"THIS IS A FIRE RAINBOW - ONE OF THE RAREST NATURALLY OCCURING
>ATMOSPHERIC PHENOMENA.
>
> THE PICTURE WAS CAPTURED THIS WEEK ON THE IDAHO/WASHINGTON BORDER.
>THE EVENT LASTED ABOUT 1 HOUR.
>
> CLOUDS HAVE TO BE CIRRUS, AT LEAST 20K FEET IN THE AIR, WITH JUST
>THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF ICE CRYSTALS AND THE SUN HAS TO HIT THE CLOUDS AT
>PRCEISELY
>58 DEGREES.
> Amazing"

http://thephotoforum.com/gallery/files/7985-FireRainbow.jpg

song2006 · Jul 27, 2006

thats not real :scratch:

PNA · Jul 27, 2006

song2006 said:
thats not real :scratch:

Can you explain???

I also have my doubts.

tasman · Jul 27, 2006

If you do a search for "Fire Rainbow" in MSN Search it found it on the National Geographic web site. Same Picture. It also found it on a few other sites.

AluminumStudios · Jul 27, 2006

I think another common term for that phenominon is Sun Dog. I saw one in Pittsburgh a few weeks ago but unfortunatly only got crappy photos with my little Canon Powershot that I had with me at the time.

tasman · Jul 27, 2006

A sun dog is when there is a reflection of the sun in the ice crystals in the air on one or both sides if the sun, and can make a bright ring around the sun, but not a rainbow affect.

tasman · Jul 27, 2006

In order to see a rainbow the sun has to be behind you.

PNA · Jul 27, 2006

Two web sites claim the reality of this:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/firerainbow.asp

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060619-rainbow-fire.html

So it's real!

song2006 · Jul 27, 2006

from what i can see from researching a bit on the net there is no other photo like it and according to what i did find it was taken in june of this year. and lasted up to an hour. if it lasted that long, only one picture is public? seems to me like someone is making some nice bucks, just wish i would have thought of it first... it is pretty though.

here the NG link: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060619-rainbow-fire.html

tasman · Jul 27, 2006

I think so. But anything can happen with Photoshop.

journeyman · Jul 31, 2006

it is legit if snoops and wikipedia tell you it's real (not to mention wikipedia make refernce to that exact picture which it claims appered in two scientific publications)

It is real.

Arch · Jul 31, 2006

hmmm.... you are not allowed to post images that you haven't taken on the forum..... if your friend took the shot it would be ok... but he obviously hasn't..... unless he is also responsible for the images in national geographic etc,

You can link to this picture/story if you like...... but i cant see that the image will be able to stay here.

oh btw... wikipedia is an unreliable source... so if it tells you something is real, it may not be.

Alison · Jul 31, 2006

Arch is correct, an image that isn't your needs to be a link. I'm moving this to the OT area

PNA · Jul 31, 2006

Archangel said:
hmmm.... you are not allowed to post images that you haven't taken on the forum..... if your friend took the shot it would be ok... but he obviously hasn't..... unless he is also responsible for the images in national geographic etc,

You can link to this picture/story if you like...... but i cant see that the image will be able to stay here.

oh btw... wikipedia is an unreliable source... so if it tells you something is real, it may not be.

I did state the photo wasn't mine...and I did not know where it came from beyond my friend. It wasn't untill someone in the thread pointed out it was on the NG web site. I then put two links in this thread. I never claimed who's original photo it is!

Corry · Jul 31, 2006

No need to get defensive. He was merely informing you of the policy of The Photo Forum. Might be a good idea for everyone reading this to take a look at the FAQ's and Guidelines for the forum, which conveniently are linked in my sig.