Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ric Carter wrote: > You're suggesting that reflection is somehow seeing "around" the fog? No, of course. > > By that reasoning, suppose I held a mirror at my nose and looked at > the tree in its reflection. Would there be even less fog since the > reflecting surface is VERY much closer? > There would be less fog between your nose and the reflection on the water, than between your afore referred nose and the tree itself. It is simply complicating things and I don't know if it very comfortable ;-) > Actually, the distance to the tree is further in the reflection, The camera catches the reflection in the water, not the tree, but also the tree as a matter of fact in Graham's photo you get both. > thus carrying your line of vision through MORE fog. Right in terms of geometry and with a reference to the tree. > > Just a thought experiment. > > Ric > who is not a physicist and has never played one on television ?? Amiti?s phx > > > > On Jan 15, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Philippe AMARD wrote: > >> The image reflected is closer to the lens, hence the fog layer is >> thinner than to the actual tree > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >