« first day (4921 days earlier)      last day (68 days later) » 

2:13 PM
@uhoh I'm guessing off the cuff that the technological advancement was in the area of servo motors precise and smooth enough to move both axes of the alt-az mounts in a way that made them functionally equivalent to equatorial mounts moving only one axis.
 
 
2 hours later…
3:57 PM
and perhaps their associated drive electronics/software to make use of that precision.
 
 
2 hours later…
6:24 PM
Are there any digital video cameras interleaving low ISO and high ISO to get better dynamic range?
@Fizz The whole idea of edge enhancement is that it detects contract change above threshold and strengthens it. It's by definition that it misses weak edges. That said, the sign in the museum is definitely not the one present on the photo.
 
6:44 PM
Even a simple S-curve would sharpen the text without sharpening the edges of a sign.
Getty images version looks like it was not sharpened at all besides very obvious S-curve which would indeed sharpen the text.
I also love how there's obvious sharp defect on the right edge of the sign on the Getty Images version
 
7:02 PM
I really cannot explain the blurriness of the sign edge by any technical means. It's obviously somewhere in-between the face and the bricks on the front and it is obliged to be sharp as evidenced by all details preserved around it.

The sharp defect on the right sign edge of Getty version also cannot be explained. Imo the sign is significantly fake.
 
@EuriPinhollow Interesting. Thanks. What does S-curve refer to in this context?
 
@Dolphin613Motorboat S-curve is the simplest type of tonal curve which is one of most basic types of image editing.
The tonal curve is a function which maps input values of each channel to output values independently.
The sharp edges of the sink are also a great evidence why the sign is fake.
Like, the lens is obviously able to preserve sharpness of the sign edge.
I would love to see the $500 version but I'm not that interested.
 
Yeah, the fact that some edges are sharp and some blurry at the same focal distance is highly suspicious. Mere tone/color correction will not produce that. Edge enhancement algo's are alas more complicated.
 
7:17 PM
Also, the top answer on the "skeptics" is laughable because it does not even mention Cecil is or has been selling a book with this image.
"no controversy" lolz
 
I should have said "working distance" not "focal distance" photo.stackexchange.com/a/73341/36913
 

« first day (4921 days earlier)      last day (68 days later) »