9372x9372 hi res image of Manhattan on 23.09.01

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
Post Reply
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

9372x9372 hi res image of Manhattan on 23.09.01

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

this is a direct link and the image is 14mb. you might want to right click>save. your browser may not like it.

bink
Top
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

here's a mirror in case the original craps out.
Top
bitWISE
Posts: 10704
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 1999 8:00 am

Post by bitWISE »

That's one hell of a camera!
Top
Guest

Post by Guest »

88 megapixels... I'm guessing that was either a medium or a large format film camera.
Top
prince1000
Posts: 1892
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 8:00 am

Post by prince1000 »

2 1/4 chrome. lg format isn't square. weird neg mask tho.
Top
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

apparently it was taken by NOAA's Cessna Citation Jet using a Leica/LH systems RC30 camera.

also:
This image was taken on Kodak Ektachrome ES100 film shot at 1/280th of a second at f/5.6. This is one of Kodak's sharpest film stock that they make. PMost likely it was scanned on an Imacon Flextight scanner (or its equivalent) which could explain the edge to edge sharpness of the shot (many scanners can't get the corners sharp because of film curl).
http://www.digg.com
Top
User avatar
Postal
Posts: 657
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:00 am

Post by Postal »

Eesh, anyone have a lower res version?
Top
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

Postal wrote:Eesh, anyone have a lower res version?
dialup :olo:
Top
User avatar
Postal
Posts: 657
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:00 am

Post by Postal »

Not dialup : /
Top
mjrpes
Posts: 4980
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mjrpes »

Eek, I just tried opening that and my computer told me to fuck off.
[size=85]yea i've too been kind of thinking about maybe a new sig but sort of haven't come to quite a decision yet[/size]
Top
Don Carlos
Posts: 17514
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Post by Don Carlos »

amazing how much shit they moved in 12 days
Where were you when the West was defeated?
[url=http://profile.mygamercard.net/doncarlos83][img]http://card.mygamercard.net/gbar/doncarlos83.gif[/img][/url]
Top
SOAPboy
Posts: 8268
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 7:00 am

Re: 9372x9372 hi res image of Manhattan on 23.09.01

Post by SOAPboy »

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:this is a direct link and the image is 14mb. you might want to right click>save. your browser may not like it.

bink
Thats fucking sick.. i want that camera.. lmfao
[size=75][i]I once had a glass of milk.

It curdled, and then I couldn't drink it. So I mixed it with some water, and it was alright again.

I am now sick.
[/i][/size]
[img]http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/3631/171164665735hk8.png[/img]
Top
User avatar
Whiskey 7
Posts: 9711
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:00 am

Post by Whiskey 7 »

Memphis wrote:
Postal wrote:Eesh, anyone have a lower res version?
That would kind of defy the whole point in the fucking picture he's posted
ROTFLMAO :olo:


...eek downloads @ 18k/b/s
Top
Mr.Magnetichead
Posts: 2001
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Mr.Magnetichead »

I don't like this terrorism.
Top
User avatar
Whiskey 7
Posts: 9711
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:00 am

+JuggerNaut+

Post by Whiskey 7 »

+JuggerNaut+ any idea on the date the photograph was taken? What was the source"
Top
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Topic: 9372x9372 hi res image of Manhattan on 23.09.01
Top
User avatar
Eraser
Posts: 19181
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Eraser »

I remember this picture being posted on Q3W before.
Top
User avatar
Eraser
Posts: 19181
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Eraser »

amazing that 12 days later it was still smoking.
Top
bitWISE
Posts: 10704
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 1999 8:00 am

Post by bitWISE »

Eraser wrote:amazing that 12 days later it was still smoking.
Might not be smoke. Could just be the dust being kicked up by workers.
Top
netrex
Posts: 810
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2002 8:00 am

Post by netrex »

I have this. Want it as a poster. A big one ;)
[color=#DFB257][b]کΛFŦ | netrex[/b][/color] of [url=http://www.saft-clan.net/]S.A.F.T. - The Pride of [color=#FF0000]No[/color]rw[color=#0000FF]ay[/color][/url]
Top
SplishSplash
Posts: 4467
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am

Post by SplishSplash »

Pics that big always make my firefow crash. (or at least freeze for a long time)
Top
Guest

Post by Guest »

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:apparently it was taken by NOAA's Cessna Citation Jet using a Leica/LH systems RC30 camera.

also:
This image was taken on Kodak Ektachrome ES100 film shot at 1/280th of a second at f/5.6. This is one of Kodak's sharpest film stock that they make. PMost likely it was scanned on an Imacon Flextight scanner (or its equivalent) which could explain the edge to edge sharpness of the shot (many scanners can't get the corners sharp because of film curl).
http://www.digg.com
Amazing that 35mm slide film can still offer a much much higher resolution than digital.
Top
dmmh
Posts: 2501
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 8:00 am

Post by dmmh »

14 mb lol, try opening a 250 mb-ish TIFF with 256 mb RAm :D
[i]And shepherds we shall be, for thee my Lord for thee, Power hath descended forth from thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command, we shall flow a river forth to thee, and teeming with souls shall it ever be. In nomine patris, et fili, et spiritus sancti.[/i]
Top
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

Eraser wrote:I remember this picture being posted on Q3W before.
possibly one similar, but not this one.
Top
-Nick-
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2000 7:00 am

Post by -Nick- »

lol, i remember the days when i had to wait 2 hours for 15 odd meg. now this 240k per sec lark is off the hook
Top
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”