Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time • Hacker News Board

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#171

Post by thaumasiotes » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 5:50 PM UTC

ada1981 wrote: post #95

thaumasiotes wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, the fact that they chose the same photo might not necessarily mean that photo is the "optimal choice" according to some algorithm: it can perfectly be a coincidence. Well, obviously it does mean that; the photo was the optimal choice according to the two algorithms used by those photographers to choose their picture. Does that mean it would also be selected by another equally good or superior algorithm? No.…

The algorithm could simply be "randomly select an image from all the burst frames."

True, but the image in question would trivially be optimal according to that algorithm, as it considers all images equal. If all images are equal, there is no image better than this image.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#172

Post by alex_duf » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 5:51 PM UTC

cecilpl2 wrote: post #149

logfromblammo wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at the two photos as a stereogram--focus through the plane instead of crossing your eyes. If they were identical, there would be no 3d effect. My eyes can't figure out how to resolve the foreground waves, because the photographers were too far apart, but the spray wraps around the lighthouse as you would expect.

As a side note, it is possible to train yourself to stereogram your eyes at will (I've done it). This makes "spot the difference" puzzles a triviality. Which is, in itself a triviality, but an entertaining one.

I somehow assumed everyone could do that. Another item to put on the super-power list.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#173

Post by ghaff » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 5:54 PM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #157

drivers99 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fact makes it possible, but as he pointed out, they were taking photos at different rates of burst mode, and even then they happened to snap at the same millisecond. Usually each picture in burst mode of moving water is completely different. I think in that gas it makes sense that they would choose the same subject and the same photo since it was probably the biggest splash from that wave. As if they were choosi…

I question the exact same millisecond part. There’s zero proof of that (and actually counter proof examining the photos). Same second, sure. Same millisecond, I think someone is reaching a bit much to make a story.

As I said in another comment, I'm pretty sure "same millisecond" is being used by the photographer in the sense of "same instant" or "same moment in time" not literally same millisecond based on a super-accurate time source. That information does not exist in the photo's EXIF data which is one-second resolution and typically derives from a manual time/date setting in the camera's menu.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#174

Post by estebank » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 5:55 PM UTC

juanmirocks wrote: post #170

With probably hundreds of photographers at pretty crowded/famous spots (say sports, famous buildings, or nature places) and using long shutter speeds, should not these improbable coincidences be not so improbable?

It's a picture of waves crashing at high shutter speeds to be able to sharply capture the scene. having the same picture of a person (slow moving) or a lightning (slow shutter speeds) is much easier.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#175

Post by craigds » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 5:56 PM UTC

tabio wrote: post #167

yangyang wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah, I don't deny it isn't insanely improbable. Still, finding same strike in a newspaper, shot from a very similar angle, was quite surprising.

Nice quadruple-negative.

Surprisingly readable!

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#176

Post by jsjohnst » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 6:01 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #173

jsjohnst wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I question the exact same millisecond part. There’s zero proof of that (and actually counter proof examining the photos). Same second, sure. Same millisecond, I think someone is reaching a bit much to make a story.

As I said in another comment, I'm pretty sure "same millisecond" is being used by the photographer in the sense of "same instant" or "same moment in time" not literally same millisecond based on a super-accurate time source. That information does not exist in the photo's EXIF data which is one-second resolution and typically derives from a manual time/date setting in the camera's menu.

I am not taking issue with the author of the post as I agree, that is likely the intent. But folks here seem to be parroting it as fact rather than taking the liberty you and I seemed to do.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#177

Post by jerf » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

cecilpl2 wrote: post #149

logfromblammo wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at the two photos as a stereogram--focus through the plane instead of crossing your eyes. If they were identical, there would be no 3d effect. My eyes can't figure out how to resolve the foreground waves, because the photographers were too far apart, but the spray wraps around the lighthouse as you would expect.

As a side note, it is possible to train yourself to stereogram your eyes at will (I've done it). This makes "spot the difference" puzzles a triviality. Which is, in itself a triviality, but an entertaining one.

I actually got a slight amount of use out of this recent with one of the Super Mario Odyssey hint arts: http://oyster.ignimgs.com/mediawiki/apis.ign.com/super-mario...

I also recently discovered you can make plain-text stereograms:

    O  O  O  O O   O O   O  O  O  O  O  O

I'm sure I'm not the first but I was still amused.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#178

Post by yangyang » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 6:03 PM UTC

excalibur wrote: post #154

yangyang wrote: post #96

I had the same thing happen with one of my photos of lightning in London. I actually thought my shot had been ripped off at first glance, then realised it was from a different angle. Mine: https://www.flickr.com/photos/beechlights/2739042419/in/phot... Alternative, from the Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/earth/2515...

The bolt of lightning is clearly identical, but I'm having a difficult time correlating buildings between the two shots. My guess is they were taken a mile or two apart.

IIRC the other shot is somewhere south of the river. I worked it out at the time. I was near Tower Bridge on the north side.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#179

Post by jsjohnst » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #133

smichel17 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said they compared EXIF metadata, so they should know when each of the shots were taken. I'm not a photographer and don't know what level of detail is recorded there, though.

The time in the EXIF metadata is just based on the time/date stamp that's been set in the camera. I don't know about the newer Canon but I'm pretty sure the older model would just be something someone manually set. Re-reading the article, I think saying the pics were shot at the "same millisecond" was just a colloquial expression to mean the look of the waves makes it look as if they were shot at the exact same time.…

Both cameras (5DM4 and 60D) can be set via GPS using a Canon accessory, but I highly doubt that is the case (very few own that from what I have seen). Even then, the camera doesn't preserve millisecond data in the EXIF data.

Re: Two Photographers Unknowingly Shot the Same Millisecond in Time

#180

Post by ghaff » Thu, Mar 08, 2018, 6:07 PM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #176

ghaff wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said in another comment, I'm pretty sure "same millisecond" is being used by the photographer in the sense of "same instant" or "same moment in time" not literally same millisecond based on a super-accurate time source. That information does not exist in the photo's EXIF data which is one-second resolution and typically derives from a manual time/date setting in the camera's menu.

I am not taking issue with the author of the post as I agree, that is likely the intent. But folks here seem to be parroting it as fact rather than taking the liberty you and I seemed to do.

That's true. I also think many of the readers of this site tend to take terms like "millisecond" literally and at face value :-)