So, how did Laurie get a quadruple exposure?
Or were there really four moons that night?
(And I asked him; he's not telling.)
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Impossible. Can't be done.
... get a double exposure in a modern camera, that is.
So, how did Laurie get a quadruple exposure?
Or were there really four moons that night?
(And I asked him; he's not telling.)
So, how did Laurie get a quadruple exposure?
Or were there really four moons that night?
(And I asked him; he's not telling.)
2 comments:
I'm having to moderate all comments because Blogger seems to have a problem notifying me. Sorry about that. I will review them several times daily, though, until this issue is fixed.
Also, I have word verification on, because I found out that not only do I get spam without it, but it gets passed on to anyone commenting in that thread. Not cool!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It looks like he left the flash off (thus extending the time in which the camera was "exposed") and managed to shake or twitch during the 1-3 seconds that the shutters were open; thereby creating the quadruplet effect.
ReplyDeleteYes, he would have taken the photo without flash; the street was too far away to be affected by it.
ReplyDeleteBut that must have been quite a twitch! Slide, twitch, and then an identical slide, to get two identically blurred images.