Camels

[Egg Bramhill]

Here's a very interesting photo. Do you think it's genuine or photoshoped? My guess is it's photoshoped.

[mwenz]

It's either photoshop or enhaced. Lower left area is already in a shadow. There's at least one camel that shouldn't even be casting a shadow as the body has no light hitting it.

[Egg Bramhill]

I agree Mike. Also in the area of the highlighted box, with such sharp shadows, the shadow would be falling on the camel above it (to the left of it?), but it's not.

[mwenz]

Yeah. And no matter what, I think that even with such a low aspect to the sun, the shadows are a bit too hard on the type of surface they are cast upon. There should be a bit of diffusion as the shadow grows longer too.

[Egg Bramhill]

I agree, they are far to hard.

[gwpriester]

The Myth Busters.

[pauland]

We can't have any idea of the contours of the ground and the sun is very low in the sky to cat those shadows, so there's no way I would expect the shadow of one camel to fall over another.

Diffusion in a desert sun? No.

I have a lot of faith in National Geographic and I really don't think your conclusions are substantiated guys.

[mwenz]

National Geo has been caught photoshoping in the past.

The diffusion should occur at the edges of the shadows. It should be slightly gritty at some point in the shadows.

[Egg Bramhill]

Yes, NG are being taken for a ride. Look at the same shadows in the photo, sone are scaled/skewed and very slightly altered, but it's photoshoped.

[pauland]

I'll call NG and let them know where to find some photographic analysts. They're quite new to this photography stuff.