Factual Information > Video / Photography
Zolotaryov's camera
Jakub Firlej:
Frame 3. Finish. This activity raises many questions.
cz:
Hi Jakub,
Thanks for your explanations. Obviously, you have thought about your analysis very carefully.
I agree with your argument that to take any photo with a chance of showing something, a source of light is needed. The tent location and the scene at the fire are to known situations, where there was light.
I see how you identify the stone with the structure in the photo. It is of course tough to establish anything reliable here, but I think this stone is located underneath the famous cedar? Then this is at least not just any stone in the Urals, but a rather special one.
If you are interested, you can find my interpretation of this photo here:
https://ibb.co/t2dZbtj
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=140.0
I do not find a particular problem with perspective when considering that this might show the tent. Also the camera was not necessarily in an ideal position so probably it is not upside-down because one can hardly take a photo then but some rotation may have to be considered. I also found this dark structure above what you interpret as the fire intriguing, however, I thought that it may be a part of the tent, which actually consisted of two tents stitched together (and this would then be the thicker part of the overlapping canvas).
I am a bit skeptical about frames 4 and 11 because these really show tiny fractions of the photo. People have argued that frame 11 may show a plane (this is also the name assigned by Yakimenko). The idea is that a plane may still be seen in the light of the Sun, when it is close to the horizon, when you are already standing in the dark on the ground when the Sun is obscured by a mountain or so.
It remains difficult and certainly a bit speculative. Maybe we are only looking at water damage. Anyway, I find your new ideas very interesting.
Chees, CZ
BTW: As you seem to be interested in DPI photography, I wonder what you think about this
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=303.0
Jakub Firlej:
Hi. Thanks for all your comments.
Thanks for your explanations. Obviously, you have thought about your analysis very carefully.
First, a general issue.
I don't want to prove, that there is a fire under the cedar for sure. I want to get the maximum content of these photos. Any convictions derive from what goes to reveal. And I treat them carefully. I'll see what the next photos will show. And will it be a coherent story? This is related to the theory that there is a tent in the photo. I tortured this photo for two weeks. In all ways. The tent doesn't appear.
--- Quote from: cz on December 18, 2020, 04:06:37 PM ---
Hi Jakub,
I see how you identify the stone with the structure in the photo. It is of course tough to establish anything reliable here, but I think this stone is located underneath the famous cedar? Then this is at least not just any stone in the Urals, but a rather special one.
--- End quote ---
The stone is under the cedar. Photo here: https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=78.0
I'm placing frame 3 on this photo (reference point - stone) gives a reliable positioning of the figures in the field:
--- Quote from: cz on December 18, 2020, 04:06:37 PM ---
I do not find a particular problem with perspective when considering that this might show the tent. Also the camera was not necessarily in an ideal position so probably it is not upside-down because one can hardly take a photo then but some rotation may have to be considered. I also found this dark structure above what you interpret as the fire intriguing, however, I thought that it may be a part of the tent, which actually consisted of two tents stitched together (and this would then be the thicker part of the overlapping canvas).
--- End quote ---
It's not a camera rotation. I had the biggest problem with perspective. It is twisted in the photo. I couldn't understand why for a very long time.
These photos helped me understand this twist of perspective:
--- Quote from: cz on December 18, 2020, 04:06:37 PM ---
I am a bit skeptical about frames 4 and 11 because these really show tiny fractions of the photo. People have argued that frame 11 may show a plane (this is also the name assigned by Yakimenko). The idea is that a plane may still be seen in the light of the Sun, when it is close to the horizon, when you are already standing in the dark on the ground when the Sun is obscured by a mountain or so.
--- End quote ---
Then I am torturing frames 4 and 11 now. I will check if there is anything more than we can see.
--- Quote from: cz on December 18, 2020, 04:06:37 PM ---
BTW: As you seem to be interested in DPI photography, I wonder what you think about this
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=303.0
--- End quote ---
I think there is the same effect in both photos. On the second one is hardly visible.
Greetings.
fdrnas:
What od this?No data edit
Jakub Firlej:
Frame 04
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version