Is this actually possible to capture on camera? Because even the New York Times is reporting it's real now.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width2048Image Height1366
>>4337229Professional photographer was spamming at max fps on a pro body + had good luck
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/14/us/politics/photo-path-trump-assassination.htmlcame here to ask about this. It was a NYT photographer, Doug Mills, who took the picture. I want to know if he is releasing EXIF. Curious why the image quality is so bad, but it was probably a crop of a wide shot.
>>4337229>I want to know if he is releasing EXIFProbably not
>>4337330>capturing at 30fpsbasically a video camera at that point
>>4337335Not the same thing
>>4337335Its mirrorless so yeah, it is a video camera.
>>4337330>>4337332actually, in looking at the triptych, the quality is fine. It seems someone cranked up the brightness on >>4337229
>>4337229>>4337330>shit colors>SonyChecks out
>>4337335Apologize
>>4337461Suck a dick.
>>4337468The picture of the year is basically a frame from a movie, I'm once again proven right about my assertion that cinema is the height of photography.Political rallies are basically movie sets, from a photographic point of view.
>>4337468fathomably based
>>4337229>1/8000th of a second>full of motion blur on human subjectpick one
>>4337229I’ve seen comments on yougramtok from “ex military trust me bro” types who say it’s Vapor trail or something like that, not the actual bullet itself.
>zion don is now a living martyrIt's all so tiring.
>>4337229>fastest .556 goes 993m/s>1/4,000th of 993 is .248 (24.8cm)yeah. it's entirely possible that that's the bullet.note we don't know exactly what caliber or gun he was running.
>>4337229The one thing that seems a bit ridiculous to me.Let's say it is Ev16 (highly likely) . Let's say it's 1/4000s.The photo was taken with a tele lens for sure, but aperture value should be small (at least f8) according to background and DoF.Who the hell takes photos at 800iso at 16EV? Is this the secret pro's technique I don't know about?
>>4337546>.556It's 5.56mm dummy, aka .223. If it's not AI bullshit it's likely debris from the impact, which moves slower than the bullet itself.
>>433754824-70f8, af-c, ch+ and be thereiso 800? yeah buddy that's why we got full frame and those delicious fat, deep pixels
>>4337546>>4337548remember those cameras have a rolling shutter:)
>>4337729retard
>>4337757No one cares, roll yourself out of this thread.
The photo was taken by a Sony alpha 9 III at 1/8000 shutter speed. The camera is actually capable of 1/80000 shutter speed.>Source: My waifu is Japanese and this story is big in Japan because the cameras used were Japanese.
>>4337548>Let's say it is Ev16 (highly likely) .>Let's say it's 1/4000s.>The photo was taken with a tele lens for sureholy retard. the exif is literally available.
>>4338169>ilce-1So much for the global shitter. It's like, the one good snoy.>24mm gm for event photographyAbsolute madman.>Exposure program: manualHA. P is NOT for professional.
>>4338169So he wasn't on a 24-70?
>>4338196Multiple people photographed the event, each with multiple camera/lens combos.
>>4338169so this is a full-frame camera, wide angle crop as expected.
>>4337330you are correct[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Width411Image Height605
>>4338489What the fuck are these settings. F/1.6 and 1/8000s? I'm fucking sorry? I can't even understand what he was going for. Did somebody leave their ND filter at home?
>>4338489Jesus the lord! f1.6 1/8000. What is this?
>>4338492I am new to photography, is it bad because 1.6 is supposed to be for indoor photography?
>>4338489>>4338491>>4338492>fully open for subject isolation, autofocus got me>max the shutter speed, no chance of blur>iso? iso is whatever it needs to be
>>4338509Dont bother, all of these fags are still shooting with old ass camera's
>>4338492Professional photography. Subjects can twitch fast enough to blur at 1/2000 and sometimes 1/4000. 24mm has enough DOF for a group shot a few meters away at f1.4. F1.6 was for added sharpness. He had a 50mp a1, so he probably shot in aps-c mode.
>>4338169>1/8000>f/1.6lmao wtf
>>4338169>shooting nearly wide open and at the max shutter speednot the smartest guy eh?
>>4338509>fully open for subject isolationdo you know what subject isolation means?
>>4338733Because a 24mm somehow won't have enough DOF for a single guy on a podium several meters away, only standing in front of the sky?The sharpness of the crowd totally matters?Looks like he knew what the fuck he was doing based on the results
>>4338198>one of the most famous photojournalists alive is just using the screen
>>4338733Definitely a no talent hack>Mills worked in the Washington, D.C. office of United Press International, the Associated Press, and The New York Times.[5] Previously, he worked at a newspaper in Virginia.[6] In 1993, he won a Pulitzer Prize for photography for covering the Bill Clinton 1992 presidential campaign. He won a second Pulitzer Prize for AP's coverage of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.[5]>Mills won multiple awards at the "2021 Eyes of History Still Contest" of The White House News Photographers Association. His awards included Photographer of the Year and Political Photo of the Year (for a photo of then U.S. President Donald J. Trump leaving Air Force One during a lightning storm).[7] Trump called Mills the "No. 1 photographer in the world."[6] Of the seven U.S. presidents Mills covered, he considered Barack Obama the most "photogenic" and Trump the most "iconic."[6]
>>4338762>/p/: doesnt this retard know he could lower his iso or sharpen up his lens>the news: nice, no motion blur
>>4337330he slightly missed focus on Donald. The sign is sharp.
>>4338735yes buddy you know wide apertures give shallower depth of field buddy blurs the background buddy
>>4337229>4chan nerds seething about the camera settings Who fucking cares? He got the shot.
>>4338779Nothing in that photo is sharp. It's honestly impressive.
>>4338864The power of Snoy
>>4338865This assassination attempt and it's consequences has been a disaster for snoy
>>4338568:) shutter speeds are very complex, on th a1. it sort of has a highspeed virtual curtain, I think. but 1/400th sync!!
>>4337331he shows exif of a crop in the video
>>4337229The avg 5.56 bullet travels about 2800ft/s from a 16" barrel. Assuming a 150yd shot, takes it to about 2500ft/s at the podium. If the shutter was at 1/2000th, the bullet would move approx 1.25ft in 1/2000th of a second. At 1/4000th, it would move about 7.5" in that time. So, it's possible to catch it in frame, especially with how sunny it was and the light reflecting off the projectile. Speed of light moves at approx 186k miles per second. So, in 1/4000th of a second it would move roughly 46.5miles. I don't think the photographer was 47miles away.
>>4338492>>4338491>>4338489almost looks like the dude wanted to capture the bullet.
Its not the bullet you're seeing. Its the compressed air/water condensing behind it. A vapour cone trail.
>>4339112Weird huh? The white house would have had to have planned a whole assassination down to the media coverage if that were true ;^)Didnt they also let a stranger hang out on the roof above their guys and wait for 5-8 shots to go off before killing him? Hmmmmmm
>>4337474That's not even the best shot from the rally
>>4338489>adobe rgbSo pros actually do use it wtf
>>4339309The best picture from the rally also benefits from the fact it was basically a movie set.
>>4339377He works for a print publishing media outlet. Literally the one time it makes sense to use AdobeRBG, since his workflow is entirely setup to use it. No point for you and I since we pop down to some sketchy corner store to print ours out.
>>4339377It used to be mandatory for certain outlets. It probably still is on some. Many people still use it out of habit.
