/p/ - Photography » Thread #4474207

[24 / 5 / 1]

392KiB, 3397x2293, b1a57b92819b651a4b5524cbb69ba9d0-aitutaki-lagoon.jpg

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 04:50:11 No.4474207 View View Reply Original Report

hey /p/rotogs, how do you think this photo was taken?

it dates from 2010, but based on the debris and vignette it was shot on film - so I'm thinking a monopod is more likely than a drone

I also just think this is a really cool image and captures the vibe perfectly

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 05:49:31 No.4474219 Report

Quoted By: >>4474236 >>4474286 >>4474467

>vignette
That's a polariser at play anon.
>Debris
Those are birds anon.

I'm not discounting it probably wasn't a drone, but it's more likely a cheap compact digishit with a tall monopod at the extreme wide focal length.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 2MiB, 1200x675

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 07:16:21 No.4474236 Report

Quoted By: >>4474237 >>4474251 >>4474256 >>4474467

It was probably just taken from the deck of an over-water bungalow

>>4474219
>extreme wide focal length
Anon that's like 35mm full frame equivalent

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 07:36:28 No.4474237 Report

Quoted By: >>4474287 >>4474308

with slide film and clear tropical skies you often didnt need a polariser, the vignette is also very localized, i would almost say its like out of focus roof or something; would agree with anon here >>4474236

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 12:10:30 No.4474251 Report

Quoted By: >>4474262

>>4474236
Or a boat maybe

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 12:26:34 No.4474256 Report

Quoted By: >>4474261

>>4474236
>Anon that's like 35mm full frame equivalent
which on a cheap digishit there's every chance it's the widest it can go.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 13:02:33 No.4474261 Report

Quoted By: >>4474263 >>4474287

>>4474256
Terms like wide angle, extreme wide angle and ultra-wide aren't really context based terms, they refer to specific focal lengths.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 13:03:36 No.4474262 Report

Quoted By: >>4474302

>>4474251
Yeah I was thinking that too, but the water looked a little shallow for a boat with an upper deck. Could have also climbed up on a buoy

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 13:10:01 No.4474263 Report

Quoted By: >>4474287

>>4474261
Oh I didn't even remember typing extreme. My bad. Stay in drugs kids.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 15:12:28 No.4474286 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474219
lmao OP exposed as a nophoto in the first post

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 15:14:45 No.4474287 Report

Quoted By: >>4474308 >>4474357

>>4474237
>with slide film and clear tropical skies you often didnt need a polariser
what
>>4474261
sequences of words are allowed to have different meanings in different contexts, in this case "extreme" means "furthest in/along a direction" especially given the usage of "the" instead of "a" in front of it
probably why >>4474263 doesn't even remember using it, it's just part of the language
>they refer to specific focal lengths
focal length is kind of a confusing term to use here since there's at least two formats that have been mentioned
even then, I've never heard of those terms as tied to specific FoVs, they're either vague marketing terms or used relative to each other / other lenses in a system

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 16:25:43 No.4474302 Report

Quoted By: >>4474358

>>4474262
What is a sailboat?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 16:50:45 No.4474308 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474287
>>>4474237
>>with slide film and clear tropical skies you often didnt need a polariser
>what
ektachrome/kodachrome/velvia, they all have (had) very deep and saturated blues, and the skies get deeper the closer to the equator you are, must be something about the sun angle or whatever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 23:33:49 No.4474357 Report

Quoted By: >>4474397

>>4474287
>sequences of words are allowed to have different meanings in different contexts, in this case "extreme" means "furthest in/along a direction" especially given the usage of "the" instead of "a" in front of it
Of course, but that would be like using the term 'f stop' in a sentence to describe "stop filming". It's not effective communication, and in fact it caused a breakdown in communication between two people, where neither of us knew what the other was saying. There is a reason why words have definitions. To argue for the contrary is the kind of postmodern pedantry that derails otherwise productive conversations into a back-and-fourth regarding semantics, sort of like what we're doing right now.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 1MiB, 1080x565

Anonymous Sun 12 Oct 2025 23:35:48 No.4474358 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474302
I think they look sort of like this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 01:38:27 No.4474397 Report

Quoted By: >>4474410

>>4474357
dude chill out
this is all about whether you interpret "extreme" as an adjective or as part of a compound term here, not postmodern pedantry
it was perfectly clear to me what the original post meant, there was no need for
>akshually those words mean something very specific
human language isn't a programming language, it's often context-dependent and sometimes ambiguous
hell even many programming languages aren't context-free grammars and some even have ambiguous syntax

tl;dr you're autistic and think like a robot, I'm retarded for continuing to reply

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 02:16:59 No.4474410 Report

Quoted By: >>4474442

>>4474397
I mean I wasn't the one that brought up
>but words are just like, ideas man
It is helpful to teach people on a photography forum about what photography specific terms mean. I wasn't even rude the guy. Why you're continuing to defend a use of a word that wasn't even correct ""in context"" as you claim, boggles the mind. That anon is obviously new so learning that terms like wide, standard and telephoto refer to specific groups of focal lengths is helpful. If you react like this every time someone tries to help you, grasping at straws, trying whatever gymnastics are required for you to avoid a teaching moment, how do you expect to progress?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 04:09:16 No.4474426 Report

Quoted By:

Okay okay. Holy shit, I put a word in my post when I didn't intentionally mean to. My god.
I was wrong anyway because that kind of polarisation effect on the sky wouldn't be possible (or it would be far less pronounced) at 35mm. This is clearly 16-24mm territory which isn't proving it isn't a digitshit, but DOES mean that it IS an UWA shot.

I'm also rethinking and there's nothing saying there couldn't be a shack or pier where the shot is taking place that we just aren't seeing; photography is the practice of inclusion and omission, and it could simply be they framed things to keep the structure out of shot. There *could* also be a fucking burger king behind the camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 05:39:18 No.4474442 Report

Quoted By: >>4474465

>>4474410
>If you react like this every time someone tries to help you
meds
now

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 09:21:18 No.4474465 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474442
>reduced to name calling in lieu of a thought
Ok anon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A7R07529Tasmania30v35mmRVP100Roll2.jpg, 1MiB, 2048x1366

Anonymous Mon 13 Oct 2025 09:47:34 No.4474467 Report

Quoted By: >>4474653

>>4474207
It's very likely to be Velvia (purple clouds, no dynamic range).
This guy >>4474219 is right that it's a polariser darkening the sky, but wrong about the camera. It is 1000% a slide film colour scheme, and slide film dust visible all over the top left, and most jarringly the shepherd's crook shaped pube in the middle of the frame.
Old mate >>4474236 has correctly identified the likely vantage point and field of view.
Lastly; it's scanned on a potato, as 35mm Velvia should look better than most digital cameras.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot 2025-10-11 215615.png, 2MiB, 1577x1582

Anonymous Tue 14 Oct 2025 04:07:57 No.4474653 Report

Quoted By: >>4474663

>>4474467
ding ding ding

I reckon that all sound about accurate, but I'm still unconvinced it's taken from a structure, as it's probably depicting the sand bank at one foot island

sadly this is the highest quality version I could find, so it's likely the original scan, wonder if the photographer still has the negatives...?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Oct 2025 07:17:20 No.4474662 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474207
So, I did some digging, found who I believe to be the photographer, and sent him an Email. I'll reply with an update if he emails me back.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Oct 2025 07:19:54 No.4474663 Report

Quoted By:

>>4474653
It's worth noting this photo seems to be connected to Aitutaki. It appears in videos from people at the Aitutaki Private Island Lagoon Resort.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches