JPG

45 responses

• 

  Regenia Brabham   gave props (26 Sep 2009):

  This is a great shot!!!!! I love it!

• 

  Mark Jones gave props (26 Sep 2009):

  love it!

• 

  Leslie Hunziker   gave props (26 Sep 2009):

  Dubbo is awesome!

• 

  Sandro Rota gave props (26 Sep 2009):

  Absolutely amazing!

• 

  Aaron Schwartz   gave props (26 Sep 2009):

  Wow! I'd love to see a whole Dubbo series with bizarre backgrounds. Love this!

• 

  Michael Diamond said (28 Sep 2009):

  Great shot! Dubbo looks really cheeky and has that couldn't care less expression on his face as the Blue Angels throw some metal and carbon fibre around the sky. Well done!

• 

  Christopher Smith   gave props (28 Sep 2009):

  Beyond brilliant. Perfectly executed. Couldn't be better.

• 

  Feei Chung gave props (28 Sep 2009):

  Great capture!

• 

  riverS gave props (29 Sep 2009):

  my son adore this photo.)

• 

  Bruce Baker   gave props (30 Sep 2009):

  Magnifique! Words cannot express.

• 

  Sandra Dunlap gave props (1 Oct 2009):

  Great shot, I love it!

• 

  David Scott   gave props (1 Oct 2009):

  What a laugh!

• 

  Krista Schaff gave props (1 Oct 2009):

  Dubbo is a star!!! Amazing shot!!

• 

  Levi Cusio said (1 Oct 2009):

  awesome capture! well done!

• 

  Amit Tandon gave props (2 Oct 2009):

  Dubbo's the Best!

• 

  michael matlach said (2 Oct 2009):

  Both my dogs Dharma and Bodhi love this image. They can relate as we live close to the airport in Scottsdale Arizona and often have planes flying low over our house.
  
  Dubbo and the Blue Angels make a great team!

• 

  Karen Zimmerman   gave props (3 Oct 2009):

  This rocks big time!! I love Dubbo in the shot!! :-)

• 

  Julien Maury gave props (4 Oct 2009):

  iq th

• 

  Julien Maury gave props (4 Oct 2009):

  is that real??? re

• 

  Taber S gave props (6 Oct 2009):

  I love this photo!

• 

  Alexander Petrov gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  Awesome backyard looks like :)

• 

  Chris Maki added a link (7 Oct 2009):

  Here's your photo on Neatorama's "Caption this photo" contest -- in case you weren't already aware. (www.neatorama.com)

• 

  Pete Langlois gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  Great shot! I'd love to live this close to an airshow venue.

• 

  Robert Jung said (7 Oct 2009):

  I agree to Dan P's comment. this photo is obiously shopped. but however, I like the whole composition and the fun spreading out of it.

• 

  marco marzocchi said (7 Oct 2009):

  a drahatar! love this dog!

• 

  Shane Rich said (7 Oct 2009):

  I think the photo works perfectly without the "Blue Angels" shopped into it. The fact you tried to add something and pass it off as real to get more attention or votes makes me lose all respect really. I'm pretty sure this is the source you used http://bit.ly/43xyyD

• 

  Fran Forman gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  What a crazy juxtaposition: an arsenal of death and a loving loyal creature.

• 

  John Moore said (7 Oct 2009):

  I like the photo, but as others have noted, it is obviously photoshopped. As Dan P points out the DOF defies the laws of physics. I don't think the Angels element came from where Shane thinks --I believe from looking at his other images that the photographer took it himself-- however, in addition to the obvious DOF mismatch, it does look like the photos were taken from different vantage points and/or with different lenses (though the effect is subtle).
  
  I am a little miffed by JPG Mag's selective application of the rules. I've had obscure photos removed because they just looked like they violated the rules (and didn't) and here they are advertising this obviously shopped photo. Either the rules should apply to all or to none.
  
  So, let this photo stand and just remove the rule about not adding or deleting elements of a photo. Allow photoshopping and eliminate controversy.

• 

  William Lascelles said (7 Oct 2009):

  No, the planes are not super-imposed actually. The problem with the original photo was that the depth of field was really small and the original look of the planes looked odd as they were very blurry. In photo shop I used a sharpening tool around their area, but that is all. I never thought it would get this much attention to be honest!

• 

  John Moore said (7 Oct 2009):

  I need to get your sharpening software. Sharpening works by increasing local contrast. I downloaded the photo and tried to get the house outline as sharp as the planes and doing so produces a halo around the edges of the house. In fact, I can't get any kind of sharp outline of the more in focus house without a very pronounced halo. How did you manage to sharpen the planes, which would have been more out of focus than the house, without producing a halo around the edges and a very pronounced lightening between the planes?

• 

  William Lascelles said (7 Oct 2009):

  Well John, looking at your photos, you would be the expert on photoshop wouldn't you?

• 

  vanou gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  Great shot!

• 

  Maggie Boyd gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  Fantastic shot!

• 

  Mary Lascelles added a link (7 Oct 2009):

  Going viral, I see...good on you, Will! (www.neatorama.com)

• 

  Dan Berg gave props (7 Oct 2009):

  good work will...i like it. creating quite the controversy aren't we.

• 

  John Moore said (7 Oct 2009):

  I'm guessing your non-response to my question is supposed to be insulting somehow, but if so, you'll have to explain it to me.
  
  I already said I like the photo; I'm not disputing its artistic merits. The issue is simple: is it a single photo or the combination of two photos?
  
  Three people have pointed out that it is physically impossible for an object further away from the point of focus to be in sharper focus than an object that is MUCH closer.
  
  You responded that you sharpened the planes separately from the rest of the image. To judge the plausibility of this claim I can only evaluate the image posted here. Sharpening increases local contrast, so what would we expect to see? Well, sharpening the house, which is much closer and much less blurred than the planes:
  
  1. Requires A LOT of sharpening
  
  2. Dramatically increases local contrast, making the darker areas much darker and the lighter areas much lighter
  
  3. Adds a very dramatic edge halo.
  
  Do we see this around the planes? No, we don't. Furthermore, even with considerable sharpening, the roof line of the presumably more in focus house never gets as sharp as the outline of the planes; and never looks sharp at all without a very pronounced halo.
  
  You don't owe me an explanation of anything --JPG can and does arbitrarily decide how to apply its own rules. I'm just curious about how the image was created. I can learn something either way, but actually stand to gain more from a determination that it is indeed a single image, and by learning how it was produced without those nasty sharpening artifacts.

• 

  Erik Galindo said (7 Oct 2009):

  Wow! I have never seen so much arguing about postproduction here on JPG. The image is very good and has a public gained! Although even when almost all of the photographers today use photoshop, including me, Its a personal choice to reveal the techniques and photography itself its a science and a magic art. So I think William is good creating mass loved images and polemic! and Jhon is right trying to preserve the nature of unretouched images at JPG. Anyway, lets not forget we r free to see, confess and think. Peace

• 

  partha sarathi bose said (8 Oct 2009):

  Hi William,
  
  After seeinbg some of my straight shots local
  
  photographers of Calcutta,India argued the same
  
  way JPGers are saying about your work till they
  
  have seen the original file.
  
  The effects of photoshop enhancement is so vast
  
  that no one can determine what is what untill and
  
  unless it is crosschecked with proper software or
  
  the original camera file is seen.
  
  Anyway your image is eyecathing and well
  
  composed

• 

  Laurie Search gave props (8 Oct 2009):

  I, myself, don't care how you did this photo...It's AWESOME either way!!!!!

• 

  Sherry Foster said (9 Oct 2009):

  Hi Will,
  
  I never questioned the authenticity of the photo, because I live where it would be possible to snap that photo, with no editing. Just a really fast shutter. Once I get a camera that has proper pixilation for this site, and a dog as good as Dubbo, maybe I can try to duplicate the shot.

• 

  Daniel Carey said (9 Oct 2009):

  If any photo were to be shopped up here, I would have to think it was Dubbo the dog doing it. After all he is a resourceful and crafty dog. But since Dubbo does not have thumbs he could not have done it.
  
  In all seriousness, this was excellent use of camera and shutter and perfect timer on the button.
  
  Nice job Will.

• 

  Daniel Carey gave props (9 Oct 2009):

  ok, the prop is above; but here goes again - Nice photo.

• 

  Rajiv Chopra said (10 Oct 2009):

  This is a very cool shot! I like it!!:)

• 

  Anthony Neste gave props (20 Oct 2009):

  great image

• 

  Siovhinn Polizzi gave props (16 Nov 2009):

  AWESOME! Love, love, love, love, love this photo!

To add your comment, Log in or sign up!