|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 22, 2005 16:17:42 GMT -4
I thought to speak to intelligent people, but you instead are a gang of imbeciles.
The problem is that when people started speaking intelligently, you insulted them and insisted you were right all along. Clearly you are not interested in speaking to intelligent people, but merely to people who already share your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 22, 2005 16:21:14 GMT -4
You speak like a professor and like professors you don't understand very much.
No, I speak like a professional engineer who has had training in optics and who has designed optical assemblies. Funny how I know the proper terminology for the problem at hand. I also speak like a photographer -- I take approximately 3,000 photographs every year, some for pay and some just for art.
Who knows, does; who doesn't know, teaches.
I know and also do. You, apparently, do neither.
...and perhaps you will understand.
Pick up a camera with a wide-angle lens and perhaps you will understand.
|
|
|
Post by pierre1985 on Jul 23, 2005 7:12:28 GMT -4
I take approximately 3,000 photographs every year, some for pay and some just for art.
Boooommm
|
|
|
Post by skinbath on Jul 23, 2005 8:02:06 GMT -4
Re above;Have you thought of any counselling?
I know of somebody local to me.
Perhaps you`re too far away though!
Happy days.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 23, 2005 8:20:44 GMT -4
You know, one wouldn't think that the topic of lens distortion would inspire such passionate dissent.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Jul 23, 2005 9:34:16 GMT -4
You know, one wouldn't think that the topic of lens distortion would inspire such passionate dissent. LOL I was thinking the same thing
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jul 23, 2005 10:45:35 GMT -4
Pierre:
We're all waiting for you to discuss this intelligently. Feel free to start at any time.
Calling people imbeciles does not prove your argument, in fact it just makes you look bad. From this point on either discuss this maturely or leave. This is your only warning... I will ban you if you use insults again.
|
|
|
Post by pierre1985 on Jul 23, 2005 15:55:21 GMT -4
You can use any wide angle lens but you will never able to frame a horizon so curve if you take photographs standing on the ground.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jul 23, 2005 16:25:20 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by pierre1985 on Jul 23, 2005 16:34:51 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jul 23, 2005 17:32:35 GMT -4
In few images you can see horizon slightly curve but you will never able to get horizons so curve as in false images of Mars. Please look at this one again: www.pbase.com/image/20989723That's the horizon on the right. You think it's only curved slightly? Looks slightly out of focus to me. Moreso than the foreground, anyway, but this could be the result of image compression. What is the depth-of-field in that photo? Which is why the sky isn't pitch black, as in photos from the lunar surface.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Jul 23, 2005 21:18:29 GMT -4
pierre1985, give it up.
You are an ideologically biased layman trying to argue with professionals from a position of assumed intellectual superiority.
You don't have a chance.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 24, 2005 1:37:36 GMT -4
Well, I've found this site on Google, I thought to speak to intelligent people, but you instead are a gang of imbeciles. Never see you again.
I am an engineer who's been working on space projects for about 15 years, but I learned something in this thread. You should dispense with the feeble insults and try learning something too.
You claimed to be a photographic expert of some sort, but your claims don't seem to make much sense. Would you care to cite your qualifications? Also, I'd really like to hear an answer to my earlier questions.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 24, 2005 10:29:26 GMT -4
You can use any wide angle lens but you will never able to frame a horizon so curve if you take photographs standing on the ground.
Why not? I am well trained in optics. Give the projection equations that prove that height above the ground has anything to do with the degree of distortion. I am quite finished listening to you simply demand that you are right without providing any rigor. You can call me names all you want, but I have no obligation to accept you as any kind of expert in this field until you demonstrate you can enumerate and manipulate its basic concepts and use the proper terminology to describe them.
Distortion will occur in any straight line. For the purposes of terrestrial photography (which works on Mars), the horizon is a straight line defined to be at the photographer's lens level regardless of how tall he is or whether he is a robot or a man. Since, for the purposes of distortion, the horizon is simply another (putatively) straight line, it obeys only two rules: angular distance from the optical axis, and focal length of the lens.
If you see a photograph with more or less curvature in a straight line, it will be due to increased deflection from the axis, a shorter focal length, or both. It will not be due to the relative position of the camera and the straight feature.
|
|
|
Post by skinbath on Jul 24, 2005 10:37:07 GMT -4
I have some questions that may be slightly off the central theme of what is being debated here so I`ll start a new thread in the Genaral Discussion page under Astronovice.Perhaps some of you may be kind enough to take some time to reply. One of the questions is for Pierre. Many thanks.
|
|