Quote:
Originally Posted by rascaldog_fan
(1) Why there is no EXIF info available, for atleast cam model.
(2) How far away the cam person is located? It's clear the lady not observing, so my guess is cam person is not at visible distance.
(3) if cam person is far away, how he/she managed to take closeup shots without image shaking? I observe the lady is moving quickly but the pics are clear.
(4) The focus is only on the lady, all other objects (not umbrella) are blur. How did they do from far away distance?
*I had Kodak easyshare lens cam bought in 2006 (Thanks giving day sale  ) worth 100$. I used to take similar pics but only when objects are at short distance.
(5) if that camera is very expensive, why they couldn't take more pics of her quickly (burst mode?)
(6) when I zoom the pics, I am surprised to see even water drops are clearly visible on her naked body. I wonder what type of cam it is.. |
(1) As already answered by others, EXIF and other related info are easily removed, if they were at all recorded in the first place
(2) Far. You can see it from the mazing artifacts in the out-of-focus regions.
(3) There seems to be a load of light in these pictures. After all, they were taken on a beach, in the middle of the day, presumably in the summer. With a large aperture (see point 4), the exposure time will be very small. Also, nothing excludes that the photographer was using a tripod or was maybe lying down or somehow supporting the camera.
(4) Large aperture. This causes the focus to be only on one plane (that of the woman, in this case). It also increases the amount of light getting in the camera, which decreases the exposure time (see point 3). Also, a good-quality entry-level (that is, very basic) lens costs about £3000. The camera body (again, entry level), is another £3000. Stuff that costs £100 is a toy.
(5) This can only be answered by the photographer. Who knows? Maybe she went away. Maybe someone noticed him and started chasing him. Maybe he didn't want to. Who knows?
(6) See point 4.