Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Circles on digital images

Reply
Thread Tools

Circles on digital images

 
 
MC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-23-2009
Martin Brown wrote:

> MC wrote:
> > David J Taylor wrote:
> >
> >>"Martin Brown" <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:KkxOm.30508$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > MikeM wrote:
> > > > > A friend asked me what could be causing the circles on his
> > > > > photos such as the one on Flickr. Other photos in the series
> > > > > had a number of smaller circles that are in different
> > > > > positions on each photo. Any suggestions what might be
> > > > > causing it?
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/35877005@N03/4127152735/
> > > > Dust in the air near the camera very out of focus and strongly
> > > > illuminated by the built in flash.

>
> > > .. and more likely to be seen with P&S cameras as they have a
> > > greater depth of field, and have the flash axially closer to the
> > > taking lens. Less prevalent with DSLRs.

> >
> > This is correct.

>
> Although it can still happen with an SLR or DSLR if the flash is too
> close to the lens axis and the air is a bit dusty - eg at a barn
> dance.
>
> A very brutal version is in a blizzard if the flash goes off.
>
> Incidentally has anyone else seen the warning on the new Ixus 100 etc
> which says words to the effect that the flash intensity out of the
> tiny window is so high it will inflict burns if you put your finger
> over it and it definitely vapourises organic dust in a puff of smoke!
>



Mmmm...if it burns enough to cause injury it would not be allowed.
Flashes do let off a lot of heat, after all the flash is indeed an
intense concentration of light. However, enough to to vapourise dust?
Maybe around the element itself but not outside the camera.

MC
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
SayWhat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-23-2009
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:53:17 -0500, rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:49:08 -0600, SayWhat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:57:00 GMT, MikeM <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>

>snip
>
>>and capture these "orbs" in their travels through spiritual planes, just
>>long enough to photograph them.
>>
>>Or ...
>>
>>It might just be air-borne dust close to the front of the camera lens when
>>the built-in flash fires.
>>
>>It's difficult to say which. It all depends on how boring and psychotic
>>your life has become as to which you will choose as the most plausible
>>explanation.
>>
>>

>
>Check out some of the "ghost photographs" web sites. Shots of camera
>straps are "vortices" from other dimensions, fogged up lenses are
>ghosts, cigarette smoke is ghosts, water vapor in your breath on a
>cold day is a ghost. Lens flare is ghosts. Smudges on windows are
>ghostly faces. The important thing to note is that your photos aren't
>bad, you have simply photographed another plane of existence.


Yes, I've seen those. I was so hoping someone would reply,

"Orbs it is, then!"

LOL

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-23-2009
MC wrote:
> Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> MC wrote:
>>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Martin Brown" <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:KkxOm.30508$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> MikeM wrote:
>>>>>> A friend asked me what could be causing the circles on his
>>>>>> photos such as the one on Flickr. Other photos in the series
>>>>>> had a number of smaller circles that are in different
>>>>>> positions on each photo. Any suggestions what might be
>>>>>> causing it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/35877005@N03/4127152735/
>>>>> Dust in the air near the camera very out of focus and strongly
>>>>> illuminated by the built in flash.
>>>> .. and more likely to be seen with P&S cameras as they have a
>>>> greater depth of field, and have the flash axially closer to the
>>>> taking lens. Less prevalent with DSLRs.
>>> This is correct.

>> Although it can still happen with an SLR or DSLR if the flash is too
>> close to the lens axis and the air is a bit dusty - eg at a barn
>> dance.
>>
>> A very brutal version is in a blizzard if the flash goes off.
>>
>> Incidentally has anyone else seen the warning on the new Ixus 100 etc
>> which says words to the effect that the flash intensity out of the
>> tiny window is so high it will inflict burns if you put your finger
>> over it and it definitely vapourises organic dust in a puff of smoke!

>
> Mmmm...if it burns enough to cause injury it would not be allowed.


Why not? Plenty of devices are close to borderline of being capable of
causing injury if misused. Kettles for instance.

> Flashes do let off a lot of heat, after all the flash is indeed an
> intense concentration of light. However, enough to to vapourise dust?
> Maybe around the element itself but not outside the camera.


I am not kidding. I'll find the safety warning card which is clearly an
addition. The warning says do not obscure the flash with your finger or
third degree burns may result. The flash window on it is tiny!

The main manual only says do not take flash photos of a baby at closer
than 1m distance. The afterthought warning is on the packing list card
labelled "CAUTION: Read Reverse" and that says in several languages..

--exact verbatim quote UK instruction card ---
Caution
When using the flash, be careful not to cover it with your fingers or
clothing. This could result in burns or damage to the flash. In regular
use, small amounts of smoke may be emitted from the flash. This is due
to the high intensity of the flash burning dust and foreign materials
stuck to the front of the unit. Please use a cotton swab to remove dirt,
dust or other foreign matter from the flash to prevent heat build up and
damage to the unit.
--end quote --

Even an ordinary high guide number flashgun of the classic 2x1" aperture
type will cook flies at point blank range if they are unlucky enough to
be on the front surface when it fires. They don't work too well after
being flash boiled and spiral to the ground.

Regards,
Martin Brown
 
Reply With Quote
 
Don Lope de Aguirre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2009
"rwalker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > Check out some of the
"ghost photographs" web sites. Shots of camera
> straps are "vortices" from other dimensions, fogged up lenses are
> ghosts, cigarette smoke is ghosts, water vapor in your breath on a
> cold day is a ghost. Lens flare is ghosts. Smudges on windows are
> ghostly faces. The important thing to note is that your photos aren't
> bad, you have simply photographed another plane of existence.


I took some photos in my bathroom one day and about 3 of them had what
looked exactly like ghost plasma I've seen in photos claiming to be spirit
plasma, blue smoky band, tried to reproduce it and never could.

 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2009
Don Lope de Aguirre wrote:
> "rwalker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > Check out some of
> the "ghost photographs" web sites. Shots of camera
>> straps are "vortices" from other dimensions, fogged up lenses are
>> ghosts, cigarette smoke is ghosts, water vapor in your breath on a
>> cold day is a ghost. Lens flare is ghosts. Smudges on windows are
>> ghostly faces. The important thing to note is that your photos aren't
>> bad, you have simply photographed another plane of existence.

>
> I took some photos in my bathroom one day and about 3 of them had what
> looked exactly like ghost plasma I've seen in photos claiming to be
> spirit plasma, blue smoky band, tried to reproduce it and never could.


Were you shooting into the mirror and instead of your reflection you saw
the dreaded plasma?

That isn't good. I hope you have Medicaid or some such, but it's
probably not covered.

--
john mcwilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2009
MC <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> However, enough to to vapourise dust?
> Maybe around the element itself but not outside the camera.


Old (used bought) 550ex flash with a ... uhm, somewhat darkened
flash window. Released slight, but clearly visible smoke curls
from said slightly opaque plastic whenever fired at full power.
Looked like smoke from a burning cigarette.

And that's a comparatively huge window ...

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2009
rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:19:11 -0600, The DSLR-Troll's Correction
>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:01:36 GMT, "David J Taylor"



>>And yet, I have never seen even one in the hundreds of thousands of
>>photographs that I've taken with my P&S cameras.


> Try taking the lens cap off.


The slime would have to *buy* a camera to take off a lens cap.

It's far easier to *steal* DSLR shots from flickr and 'show'
them using tiny sizes and anonymous and soon (if not always)
invalid URLs instead of ones like
| http://www.flickr.com/photos/35877005@N03/4127152735/
and claim they're the slime's handheld, shot in complete darkness,
etc. etc. etc. P&S shots. Which explains the "hundreds of
thousands of photographs" claim: flickr is huge.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bhogi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-26-2009
On 23 nov., 22:37, Martin Brown <|||(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> MC wrote:
> > Martin Brown wrote:

>
> >> MC wrote:
> >>> David J Taylor wrote:

>
> >>>> "Martin Brown" <|||(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >>>>news:KkxOm.30508$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>>>> MikeM wrote:
> >>>>>> A friend asked me what could be causing the circles on his
> >>>>>> photos such as the one on Flickr. Other photos in the series
> >>>>>> had a number of *smaller circles that are in different
> >>>>>> positions on each photo. Any *suggestions what might be
> >>>>>> causing it?

>
> >>>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/35877005@N03/4127152735/
> >>>>> Dust in the air near the camera very out of focus and strongly
> >>>>> illuminated by the built in flash.
> >>>> .. and more likely to be seen with P&S cameras as they have a
> >>>> greater depth of field, and have the flash axially closer to the
> >>>> taking lens. *Less prevalent with DSLRs.
> >>> This is correct.
> >> Although it can still happen with an SLR or DSLR if the flash is too
> >> close to the lens axis and the air is a bit dusty - eg at a barn
> >> dance.

>
> >> A very brutal version is in a blizzard if the flash goes off.

>
> >> Incidentally has anyone else seen the warning on the new Ixus 100 etc
> >> which says words to the effect that the flash intensity out of the
> >> tiny window is so high it will inflict burns if you put your finger
> >> over it and it definitely vapourises organic dust in a puff of smoke!

>
> > Mmmm...if it burns enough to cause injury it would not be allowed.

>
> Why not? Plenty of devices are close to borderline of being capable of
> causing injury if misused. Kettles for instance.
>
> > Flashes do let off a lot of heat, after all the flash is indeed an
> > intense concentration of light. *However, enough to to vapourise dust?
> > Maybe around the element itself but not outside the camera.

>
> I am not kidding. I'll find the safety warning card which is clearly an
> addition. The warning says do not obscure the flash with your finger or
> third degree burns may result. The flash window on it is tiny!
>
> The main manual only says do not take flash photos of a baby at closer
> than 1m distance. The afterthought warning is on the packing list card
> labelled "CAUTION: Read Reverse" and that says in several languages..
>
> --exact verbatim quote UK instruction card ---
> Caution
> When using the flash, be careful not to cover it with your fingers or
> clothing. This could result in burns or damage to the flash. In regular
> use, small amounts of smoke may be emitted from the flash. This is due
> to the high intensity of the flash burning dust and foreign materials
> stuck to the front of the unit. Please use a cotton swab to remove dirt,
> dust or other foreign matter from the flash to prevent heat build up and
> damage to the unit.
> --end quote --
>
> Even an ordinary high guide number flashgun of the classic 2x1" aperture
> type will cook flies at point blank range if they are unlucky enough to
> be on the front surface when it fires. They don't work too well after
> being flash boiled and spiral to the ground.
>
> Regards,
> Martin Brown


My Canon 430EX fits your description. It is true that its flash is
blinding at full power to the near wall, but it burns nothing. Out of
curiosity I flashed it full power touching my skin and I can feel some
instantaneous heat but far from it being able to burn anything. 2x1"
is a large area compared to P&S flashes.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using ImageMap and displaying circles on it Gilgamesh ASP .Net 0 01-06-2006 10:54 AM
To create crossed circles in Java henryh Java 1 09-18-2005 10:54 PM
The ever decreasing circles syndrome & wireless networking! David W Allen Wireless Networking 9 11-18-2004 11:57 AM
windows update going in circles Les Computer Support 1 09-05-2003 05:37 AM
debuger sending me in circles - trying to view dataset Jason Shohet ASP .Net 3 08-28-2003 07:23 PM



Advertisments