JeepDiver 0 #26 February 13, 2006 I posted the picture into another forum I hang out at with my fishing buddies, here is what I got as a reply. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #27 February 13, 2006 I just had a hysterectomy, it was to much a bother to mess with pills lolSudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #28 February 13, 2006 Quotemenstrating women shouldnt swim in the ocean .... Or hike where there are bears or mountain lions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ripcord4 0 #29 February 14, 2006 QuoteEither way, it scares the SHIT out of me. I vote for Photoshop. It is very similar to another photo of a "Great White" lunging at a guy on a ladder under a UH-60 helo, supposedly taken in San Francisco Bay. That was obviously a fake. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #30 February 14, 2006 Great Whites arent shaped that way anyways, nor is that their coloring, but its a nice picSudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindercles 0 #31 February 14, 2006 Quote I vote for Photoshop. It is very similar to another photo of a "Great White" lunging at a guy on a ladder under a UH-60 helo, supposedly taken in San Francisco Bay. That was obviously a fake. Yeah, that picture is obviously shopped, but this one looks nothing like that one at all. Except that they both happen to have a shark in them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #32 February 14, 2006 Ripcord4, the one you're referring to has obvious signs of 'Shopping; some distortion, some footprints from lasso-ing, et cetera. As Lindercles says, there's none of that happening in this shot. LisaMarie, you brought up a good point. So I went and looked at some Great White shark photos to see about coloring. The white part is on their underside, not the top, sort of tu-toned, I'd guess, so I can see that this one's coloring is what I would expect if I were looking from the top down in midday light through water. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viking 0 #33 February 14, 2006 QuoteI'm willing to put a donut on the line and say that the shot was taken from a lower flying airplane/chopper, which would account for no shadowing of it in the shot (it would be to the right of the shot) due to the angle of the sun. I'm gonna have to call you on this one. If it was an airplane........thats a REALLY low flying airplane, if it were a chopper there would be some evidence of the rotor wash on the water surface and probly scare the hell out of the shark. In both cases the movement would create a noticeble amount of panning blur even in the direct sunlight. i think the more logical platform was a large boat.I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #34 February 14, 2006 Arthur, you're right about panning blur, but what if it were a, say, 800L? That would eliminate the need to be very low, and with slight crop, also eliminate the blur. I've taken shots from a Cessna over Monument Valley and they've not had a panning blur, and I was using my 75-300 (non L) glass. They were crisp and sharp...and I've seen planes fly 200-150 feet off the deck and not create a disturbance to their side; and not much in back. So it really could easily be a smaller plane without too much stretch. I've also seen a boat create disturbances, from their prow breaking through the water. I'll give you a donut anyway, but I think it's relatively inconclusive, the lack of rotor wash or disturbance from a lower flying plane, and from what I understand, the rotor spray we see comes from a hovering helo, and doesn't happen too much from one flying at 200-150 feet. I just don't think it was from a boat... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sd-slider 0 #35 February 14, 2006 QuoteI never heard that, just heard menstrating women shouldnt swim in the ocean .... QuoteTHAT is exactly why I am manipulating my pills so that I am not having that problem when I go to Hawaii I never heard that, just heard manipulating women shouldnt swim in the ocean .... Anvil Brother #69 Sidelined with a 5mm C5-C6 herniated disk... Back2Back slammers and 40yr old fat guys don't mix! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #36 February 14, 2006 Yes great white sharks are white on the under bodies and med grey on the top not black, they have a much different body shape then is pictured here as well. Great white sharks are more the hide then attack by often times bringing their whole bodies out of the water in an attempt to show themselves. They also slide their tail from side to side while swiming, the ripples in the picture does not show that, instead they show that the tail fin is slicing through the water. Then just by reading the caption, it states the kyack is 3.8 meters, but the shark is only 4 meters.... which means that shark should only appear a foot or so bigger then the boat....Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #37 February 14, 2006 Hi, Lisa. Not doubting you, but I went over to Chris Fallows' web site, where I had been earlier, and this is a pretty good match for both darkness as well as shape. Chris Fallows Photographic website (Look through it, there are some seriously intense shots there). I'm certainly no expert, and don't really know a lot about them (other than get out of the water if one is near enough...LOL), but either way, if this isn't a GW, it's still a shark approaching a boat. As for the measurements, I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, really; perspective has a lot to do with photos, and because of that, if one is above and behind, the foreground object (i.e. the shark) will appear larger while the further object (i.e. the kayak and person) will appear smaller. Lastly, I can see how the ripples would be left if the shark is simply coming along slowly (for a shark); the ripple wouldn't be large, and would trail to the rear and not directly to the side with a much more violent lateral motion. If it were a small motion, then it would produce this small ripple. Again, all this is simply my opinion...not looking to argue with anyone at all... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cesslon 0 #38 February 14, 2006 this image is 100% real it was done by south african researchers, they were using the kyak to get closer to the shark without baiting the water. its real, its real, its real, go onto many scuba d00ber forums and they will tell you all about it. and as for the blokes navy mate who says they come from below, it wasn't attacking, was just sticky beaking, I've seen photo's from friends who were spearfishing when a GWS come to visit and the shark was cruising along the surface. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viking 0 #39 February 14, 2006 if it were anything over a 300mm regardless of max f-stop the same magnifacation that flattens the viewing plane would make it a BITCH to hold steady. Speaking of flattening the plane. Take a look at the mountains in the background. If it was taken with a telephoto the shallow DOF they create would throw them out of focus. The only way to get them that in focus would be to use f22 and that would slow the shutter speed down enough to cuase blur. About the plane/helo thing. Come on girl you know what 200 feet looks like and the angle of view it creates. I still think it was taken with a medium length lens from an anchored boat.I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #40 February 14, 2006 arthur, that pic could have easily been taken from an open air ultralight such as the leza air-cam. in fact, that airframe was designed for such things. it could loiter quietly at a very low speed and a very low altitude, like 20 feet and 35 kts. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viking 0 #41 February 14, 2006 could have been but unless that guy paddled all the way out there from shore...........................I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #42 February 14, 2006 Quotecould have been but unless that guy paddled all the way out there from shore........................... why is that a problem? I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Icon134 0 #43 February 14, 2006 QuoteQuotecould have been but unless that guy paddled all the way out there from shore........................... why is that a problem? I was gonna say... that's not as hard as you might think... Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #44 February 14, 2006 F22? Nah, you can get it with a bit faster...just have to work it a bit more. You may be right, it might be an anchored boat, and I'll give ya the donut anyway; but I still think that the flattening isn't absent but rather minimal without any apparent blur, and because of that, a longer lense might've been used than a 300. You should see some of the stuff I get with my old film 300 on my 20D, at f's much faster than 22. And I'm not skilled at all! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #45 February 14, 2006 I call bullshit on this story, wheres a link? If it is everywhere? Research is not done to that extreme without back up considering the dangers of GWs and the fact that there would be NO time for others to react if the shark went for the boat. Even if he is cruising along the surface the tail wake in the photo would not be consistent with the tails movement of a real White Shark. Also when sharks get curious, ahhh this isnt worth the fight, prove its validity with a link or Ill personally call it a fake. It isnt consistent with A White Sharks behavior or B research behavior.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #46 February 14, 2006 The Scuba divers are voting photoshopped.... yes I am a dork and yes I signed up on a SCUBA board just to link to this thread http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=129552Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindercles 0 #47 February 14, 2006 Ok, so it seems like the main argument against the picture is "it's not a great white." Fine, it's not a great white, it's some other kind of shark. That in itself doesn't make the picture a fake. Yes, the wake from the sharks tail looks as though it is slicing through the water and not moving side to side. But you can only see a couple of feet behind the shark and it's possible that he was just cruising for the last few feet. Sharks don't move their tails from side to side ALL the time. And no, if the shark shouldn't appear a foot or so bigger than the boat, the shark should be a foot or so bigger than the boat (.65 feet). But because it's closer to the camera, it will appear larger. I'm not prepared to claim that the photo is real, but I have yet to hear a convincing argument that it's not either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #48 February 14, 2006 QuoteI call bullshit on this story, wheres a link? If it is everywhere? Research is not done to that extreme without back up considering the dangers of GWs and the fact that there would be NO time for others to react if the shark went for the boat. Even if he is cruising along the surface the tail wake in the photo would not be consistent with the tails movement of a real White Shark. Also when sharks get curious, ahhh this isnt worth the fight, prove its validity with a link or Ill personally call it a fake. It isnt consistent with A White Sharks behavior or B research behavior. Easy there killer. Easy. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
larsrulz 0 #49 February 14, 2006 QuoteThe Scuba divers are voting photoshopped.... yes I am a dork and yes I signed up on a SCUBA board just to link to this thread http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=129552 Might wanna check back...they changed their minds. I got a strong urge to fly, but I got no where to fly to. -PF Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #50 February 14, 2006 QuoteQuoteThe Scuba divers are voting photoshopped.... yes I am a dork and yes I signed up on a SCUBA board just to link to this thread http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=129552 Might wanna check back...they changed their minds. Well. Isn't this an interesting turn of events. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
