Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 219 posts

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#101

Post by vardump »

hmottestad wrote: post #52
lervag wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Chrome thinks this site is dangerous: Your connection is not private Attackers might be trying to steal your information from calculatedimages.blogspot.com (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). Learn more NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID The message details continues to say that > You cannot visit calculatedimages.blogspot.com right now because the website uses HSTS. Network errors and attacks ar…

Fyi. This is the cert I'm getting: https://imgur.com/a/D1RQ2

That's curious.

I'm getting a different cert at least. No cert errors.

Both certs have same common name, etc. But that's where the similarities end.

This is the cert I'm getting:

Serial number: 4254239493315191306

Validity: Tuesday, 20 February 2018 - Tuesday, 15 May 2018

Public key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

Signature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

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#102

Post by jordache »

the same sub second... splash's movement frozen in time is not at the ms level precision....

Also the scenario described here is not that rare.. Once you have two photogs there that day, your chances of getting the same shot is already pertty good. The two photographers were essentially firing off continuous shots when they anticipate a wave hitting... Everyone was focused on the lighthouse...

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#103

Post by exodust »

goblin89 wrote: post #25

Two professional photographers having independently selected the exact same frame from two different bursts they captured with their cameras is an interesting instance, illustrating the pro-AI argument in photography and possibly adjacent creative domains. Grossly simplified, two humans went through dozens or hundreds of shots with identical internal “algorithm” and did the same work twice. This shows that the algori…

A simple explanation for the image selection match might be that the wave is at its highest point in the chosen image.

At this lighthouse location, photographers are looking for that shot.. they wait for the wave, then shoot. There might only be a handful of images in the burst that qualify - perhaps less than 10, so the coincidence is not that amazing. It's cool, but not "scary freaky" coincidental.

Now if they were using a single shot camera, that would be more amazing.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#104

Post by JepZ »

mannykannot wrote: post #89
JepZ wrote: post #71

I wonder why they had to look at the iron bars to find the difference in position. If you look at the waves in the foreground the difference is very obvious. Nevertheless, quite cool incident. Not just that they took a very similar photo, but also that they found out that they did.

The author addresses the displacement of the foreground waves: "I know those things are easily moved using the clone stamp in Photoshop", and he demonstrates it in the accompanying video.

Yeah, but that is related to the photo being a rip off. Manipulating the bars in the tower would be even simpler.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#105

Post by pure-awesome »

panic wrote: post #59
ScottBurson wrote: post #48

I would love to see these in a stereoscopic viewer. If they really were taken that close together in time, and given the huge binocular separation, there should be a hell of a 3-D effect.

Check out the comments at the bottom of the article -- "trialex" put together a "wiggle gif" version ( https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/42ab07151119e1a3d5a43fa... ) and "Michael Wise" posted a cross-eyed version ( https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2903120ac9e726088a33b8d... ).

Wow! They should make this into an actual one of those stereographic pictures!

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#106

Post by nwellnhof »

ggg9990 wrote: post #33
comex wrote: post #27

Literally the same millisecond (according to timestamps), or ‘only’ the same tenth of a second or so (as demonstrated by the pictures being near identical)? Those would both be unlikely and remarkable events, but one is 100 times more unlikely than the other :)

No more than 1/100s apart.

My guess is that the water doesn't move much faster than 10 m/s which translates to 1 cm/ms. You certainly can't make out 1 cm differences in the images, so the "same millisecond" claim is definitely exaggerated. From a quick look, the time difference could even be more than 10 ms, but not by much.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#107

Post by nerdponx »

skrebbel wrote: post #36

This is typical birthday paradox stuff right? The chance that these two photographers would ever snap the same thing at the same time is small, but the chance that any two photographers, anywhere, would do so is, I bet, pretty big (even if you factor in millisecond precision). With photographers being photographers and the internet being the internet, there's also a pretty decent change that they'd find out about it…

Sort of, but instead of 365 distinct birthdays you have many thousands of non-overlapping time buckets (the two different burst mode frame rate), and it also doesn't "wrap around" the way birthdays do.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#108

Post by exodust »

Jetroid wrote: post #64

Reminds me of the time when my sister and I took pictures with very similar composition of the sky - and you can see the same clouds in each photo. https://jetholt.com/connected-minds/ I love things like this.

Sorry but this is not coincidental or crazy in the slightest!

You both snapped a picture of the sky minutes apart on your way home because the sky looked nice. Okay, so what? There is nothing unusual about that. The photos are different. Clouds in different positions, different focal length... I don't see "connected minds". I see "hey, cool sky" [whips out smartphone, snaps photo].

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#109

Post by exodust »

carlmr wrote: post #93
spuz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The birthday paradox is a paradox because it describes a circumstance that seems unlikely but actually is not. In this case it both seems unlikely and IS unlikely. If it were not unlikely we would see it happen more often.

Like I posted somewhere else here, it likely happens hundreds of times a day (going by millisecond granularity and # of photos being taken per day in close vicinity in the world). That people afterwards see each others photos and find out about it is rather unlikely. It probably happens most days in the Louvre at the Mona Lisa. Although she doesn't move very much.

So it's a publishing coincidence rather than a photographic one.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#110

Post by vardump »

hmottestad wrote: post #52
lervag wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Chrome thinks this site is dangerous: Your connection is not private Attackers might be trying to steal your information from calculatedimages.blogspot.com (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). Learn more NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID The message details continues to say that > You cannot visit calculatedimages.blogspot.com right now because the website uses HSTS. Network errors and attacks ar…

Fyi. This is the cert I'm getting: https://imgur.com/a/D1RQ2

No foul play, also managed to get same cert you got (with public key 92 e0 55 f9 af 61 0d 7e 7e db 21 84 d5 dc 59 21...).

Perhaps Google uses multiple certs with same Common Name on different servers. If so, I wonder if there's some security benefit.

Or what could the reason for that be?

Post reply on HN