Tan, The caption said that it was 38 seperate shots of the sun plus one single shot of the foreground, not 38 multi exposures of the foreground as the case would be if it was a simple unmanipulated mult-exposure. They don't mention the sky, it could also be an ideal single exposure with no flares or ghost images visible, for all I or anybody (except the photos creators) know.
regards, Anthony Farr ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ok, guys, maybe this is the inexperience coming out in me again, BUT, I > don't "get" this photo. Technically, how is it possible? I mean if those > shots truly showed the sun, then how did it manage to show it as a perfect > little circle with no flare/rays etc? AND if it truly is 38 separate > exposures, each taken at different times of the year, then there should be > different shadows all over the shot everywhere, and clearly they are all > leaning to the left as though the sun is to the right? I don't know, like I > said, maybe I really don't know much at all about photography, but this shot > just doesn't seem to be "right" to me? Also, if that truly was 38 separate > exposures then wouldn't the highlights on the stone ruins etc be totally > burnt out? BUT, then it says there was only one "foreground" exposure, so > how is that possible? > > confused, and possibly showing my "blonde" side, > tan. >
