Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/03/08/two-photographers-unbeknownst.html
…
6 Likes
Also, one used a polarizing filter, while the other did not.
11 Likes
what are the chances?
With billions of photos taken every month, particularly concentrated to picturesque landmarks? I’d say fairly high.
4 Likes
what are the chances that two identical waves occur, and two photographers each capture one of them?
9 Likes
Please slow down the GIF. It almost induced an epileptic seizure!
5 Likes
I think that’s just post-processing.
1 Like
Yes please. It would make it much more effective too.
Yeah, that was bad on my eyes.
I slowed down the GIF (and tried to match the levels across frames a little better)
5 Likes
how can there be such a large change in the fore- and background, but none in the mid range?
something may be fishy here, and I’m not talking about the marine fauna 
edit: especially the white speck / wave crest in the right background should not move much between the images, should it?
Well spotted, but I think a few tenths of a second difference in the capture times would probably be sufficient to explain that difference. Whitecaps like that can form and dissipate very quickly. There’s a whole line of them in the background, not just on the right.
Look more closely at the spray around the lighthouse, and you’ll see a few differences there too, most likely caused by the very slight timing difference…
1 Like
If you cross your eyes and overlay the two images in your skull, it’s not a bad piece of 3D photography.
4 Likes
Oooh! I want two jigsaw puzzles of these two photos, cut with the same die set. The parts would be sorta interchangeable.
6 Likes
So wait, it took carefully looking at the details of the photos to figure this out? Neither one could just remember “hey, another photographer was there shooting right next to me that day”? Weird.
When do we bulldoze it or blow it up?
A second shooter, a grassy knoll, and a conspiracy theory!
18 Likes
the more identical the less probable, but this was the same wave at the same time, just slightly different vantages of a few degrees and within a fraction of a second of each other. big waves on clear days do tend to draw the shutterbugs to ideal spots like this, i think it happens more frequently than people realize.
the real amazing part to me is that the final images posted were so similar in framing and sizing that they lined up almost to the pixel. i can be standing on top of someone with the same camera and still not achieve that if i tried. different cameras and lenses from different locations, that’s just crazy. funny how two photographers can share such a similar framing aesthetic and yet have such a different visual aesthetic as far as processing, especially contrast at the far ends of the dynamic ranges, sharp vs soft.
8 Likes
Count me on Team Risman!
That’s my point. There is no difference in the spray around the lighthouse except for that due to different colors/filter. Look at the “fingers”, they are exactly the same. And that stuff is moving really fast. That lighthouse spray was shot at the same moment, < 1/10 th of a second. The change in the background, much farther away, would be much larger, and take a much longer time. I would accept a different foreground due to a slightly different perspective, but I don’t see how the background could change that much due to perspective. The wave crest would have to be hidden behind the lighthouse in the one photograph, but the perspective on the lighthouse itself does not seem to be shifted far enough to account for that, either.
1 Like
