File :-(, x, )
don't ask me for the source
i took this
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSC-T10Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:11:19 12:09:50Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating320Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.33 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height480RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessHard
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
in b4 me...
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93018
TIME PARADOX

>>93016
So I'm guessing you were in the helicopter?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93028
Do want Leica.

(Fapfapfapfapfapfapfap)
>> Anonymous
>>93027
The Ottoman Empire first used in in a war with Russia, because using a cross would alienate Muslim soldiers. Turkey kept it when the Ottoman Empire fell; Egypt also adopted it.

For awhile they were the only ones using it, but now almost every or every majority-Muslim country with a Red Cross society uses the Crescent.
>> Anonymous
>>93030
Typos, sorry.

>"used it in"
>"for a while"

Self-fix'd.
>> Anonymous
>>93026
But the explosion would have to be in the sky. That probably never happens.
>> Anonymous
After looking up who operates Blackhawks in the Middle East, this is almost certainly Egypt, Turkey, or (of course) Iraq. My guess (because of the sunbathing tourists and the sort of Soviet look of the vehicles) would be Egypt.

Where is it, OP.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93032
Yeah, and why would people be sunbathing at night? It's not a perfect theory, just the only one I had handy. I'm suspicous of that 1/13th shutter speed, too.
>> Anonymous
Methinks somebody added EXIF data to a (film, from the looks of it) photo they found on the Internets.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93037
I concur
>> Anonymous
>>93039
But why would they make it a Sony?

(In before Butterfly, but that is a serious question. Why some random Sony point-and-shoot model?)
>> Anonymous
>>93040

Probably the camera the OP owns and thus the most convenient source of EXIF data.
>> pskaught
I like it
>> Anonymous
i dont think -anything- would be that sharp at 1/13th.
>> Anonymous
EXPLOSIONS IN THE SKY
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93100
Oo, that would explain it, too. Good thinking.
>> Anonymous
>>93062

1/13th is not that slow of a shutter speed for a point and shoot.

>>93072
Godspeed You! Black Emperor is better.

>>93100
might be right.

Also, I give it about a year before commericial photographers are shooting from above the models and using explosions going off above them as a new sort of ringflash.
>> Anonymous
>>93104
uh, a helicopter isnt exactly a really stable thing to shoot from. its moving and shaking. youre not gonna get a good sharp photo from 1/13th
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>93104
Eh? 1/13th is the same speed no matter what you're shooting with. A P&S will be just as blurry at 1/13th as a Canon 1Ds Mk III (assuming they're using the same equivalent focal length and neither have an IS lens)
>> Anonymous
>>93109
Actually, no. The 1Ds Mk III has a big shaking mirror in it. Not serious most of the time, but mirror lock-up exists for a reason. and in practice a heavier camera with a physically larger lens puts more fatigue on the photographer's arms. 70-200 versus 12-33?

(On the other hand, the 1Ds Mk III can handle higher ISOs a bajillion times better, so it more than evens out, but that's not the point.)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>93040
see
>>93018
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Hey smart guys. It's a picture of a picture. I've seen it before, but I can't recall where. I think it's a Magnum shooter.
>> Anonymous
>>93113
I know it won't stop motion, but the poster I was responding to was saying nothing would be sharp at 1/13th on anything. I've gotten sharp photos with a point and shoot at 1/13th before. It's possible with a DSLR, too, but harder.
>> Anonymous
>>93118
im that poster. it was in reference to the fact he's in a helicopter and taking a picture at 1/13. nothing is going to be sharp, much less the shadows, as someone else said. i probably shoulda added in "for this photo"
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>93115

I thought it was a photo of a photo too, the shot it self towards the bottom frame slopes as if the shot hasn't been aimed properly on a flat surface.

Oh and Butterfly, stop pretending to be female. It's weird.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>93122
I dont get it, im not pretending to be anything. How you come to that conclusion?