Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Banjax]

beautiful isn't it? looks like something out of Ghostbusters  8-)

original link here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11531637

[Richie London]

pretty awesome, wouldnt like to be struck down by that 

[Kevin Wood]

Hmm. I'm wondering if that's genuine. :-/

IMHO, either the lightning's striking the ground well behind the statue and the perspective happens to work or the statue's been photoshopped in.

Either way, I'd love to catch a decent picture of lightning. Have tried a few times but yet to get really lucky.

Kevin

[Banjax]

don't think it was photo-shopped:

This is the moment a lightning bolt appears to strike the Statue of Liberty in New York. New York photographer Jay Fine had spent the night braving the storm in Battery Park City, Manhattan, in a bid to get the perfect picture. Jay spent nearly two hours poised with his camera and took more than 80 shots before striking lucky with this particular bolt of lightning at 8.45pm on 22 September. He said he had been waiting 40 years to get the picture.

To capture the shots Jay used a Nikon D300s with 60mm f/2.8 lens on the following settings: Aperture: F/10, Shutterspeed: 5 seconds, ISO: 200.

the longer he waited - the luckier he got 

[feeutfo]

It doesn't look right though, why would the lightening strike the side/back of the statue when the top is so close? Unless the strike is some distance behind? Would still think lightening would be drawn to the top of the old girl from some considerable range surely?

Cracking pic though, I love extreme weather, unless I'm in it of course.

[aaronjb]

I wondered if that was the lightening running 'down' the outside of the statue to some lightening conductor .. a little like you can see it run 'around' the outside of an aircraft.

Either way it's a nice shot, though I think I preferred the one of the aircraft passing the moon

[Kevin Wood]

It doesn't look right though, why would the lightening strike the side/back of the statue when the top is so close? Unless the strike is some distance behind? Would still think lightening would be drawn to the top of the old girl from some considerable range surely?

Cracking pic though, I love extreme weather, unless I'm in it of course.

That's what made me wonder. I would have thought it would strike the top of her arm and get conducted to ground from there. Hence wondering if the strike actually hit something behind the statue. Still, it is a very lucky picture nonetheless. Shame it's a bit noisy but I'm just being picky now.

Kevin

[Kevin Wood]

To capture the shots Jay used a Nikon D300s with 60mm f/2.8 lens on the following settings: Aperture: F/10, Shutterspeed: 5 seconds, ISO: 200.

For a D300s at ISO 200 I am surprised at the level of noise.

Kevin

[cem_devecioglu]

beautiful isn't it? looks like something out of Ghostbusters  8-)

original link here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11531637

I like it.. Thanks Banjaxx

[cem_devecioglu]

if I were him I wouldnt use iso 200.. at least 800 or 1600 would be my choice..

today I was busy as its salary day.. 

huh..did somebody say salary..where is it, mine evaporated the moment I took

credit cards, bills .. finito

[Kevin Wood]

if I were him I wouldnt use iso 200.. at least 800 or 1600 would be my choice..

Then it will be noisy.

He's used a medium ISO and stopped-down the lens to ensure a reasonably long exposure on the "fixed" parts of the image which increases the probability of catching some lightning while the shutter's open, I guess.

Then just lock the shutter button down on repeat until it strikes, and hope your memory card doesn't fill up first.

Kevin

[Omega_Dan]

looks genuine to me, know nothing about cameras and what quality of lens you need but nature can produce some amazing scenes

[cem_devecioglu]

if I were him I wouldnt use iso 200.. at least 800 or 1600 would be my choice..

Then it will be noisy.

He's used a medium ISO and stopped-down the lens to ensure a reasonably long exposure on the "fixed" parts of the image which increases the probability of catching some lightning while the shutter's open, I guess.

Then just lock the shutter button down on repeat until it strikes, and hope your memory card doesn't fill up first.

Kevin

Kevin, for those kind of photos I tend use analog machines (I use a minolta -although processor based its analog) which I believe have very good resolution..

but with those catching up a lightning is very hard..

[Turk]

It doesn't look right though, why would the lightening strike the side/back of the statue when the top is so close? Unless the strike is some distance behind? Would still think lightening would be drawn to the top of the old girl from some considerable range surely?

Cracking pic though, I love extreme weather, unless I'm in it of course.

That's what made me wonder. I would have thought it would strike the top of her arm and get conducted to ground from there. Hence wondering if the strike actually hit something behind the statue. Still, it is a very lucky picture nonetheless. Shame it's a bit noisy but I'm just being picky now.

Kevin

  That's what I thought. 

[albitz]

I saw this in the paper yesterday, and came to the conclusion that the lightning is probably touching ground on the shoreline at the far side of the statue. A bit of an optical illusion imo.
Pretty sure the lightning conductor runs from the torch down the arm and eventually to the ground. Probably got some close up photos at home but I dont fancy rooting about in the loft to find them.