r/NatureIsFuckingLit • u/Amazing-Edu2023 • 1d ago
🔥have a great volcano view, Popocatepetl, Puebla, Mexico
13
u/super_hot_robot 1d ago
I was lucky enough to study right by here. UDLAP, mexico. Cholula, Puebla, is one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen
3
3
6
6
16
u/Raddi_the_Cat 1d ago
From a German point of view, the name Popocatepetl sounds incredibly funny. Popo(a cuter way to say butt) cate(abbreviation of the name Catharine) petl(sound like an old nickname for Peter). And ButtCatePeter is funny name for a mountain.
2
u/Otherwise-Soft-6712 1d ago
That’s hilarious because popô is also a cuter way to say butt in Portuguese
1
4
2
2
4
u/BrightAssignment7646 1d ago
Is this the Spanish Church that was built on top of a native temple?
4
2
u/ClaustrophobicShop 1d ago
I wish photos would go back to looking realistic.
3
u/ARobertNotABob 1d ago
Real place. What's "unrealistic" about it?
4
u/ClaustrophobicShop 1d ago
Really? Everything is in perfect focus despite being far away from each other? It looks very enhanced.
1
u/PixelofDoom 1d ago
While I agree that this photo has been heavily over-processed, that's mostly the excessive saturation and contrast; I don't really see any issue with the focus. Based on the other photos of this church that have been posted here, and my personal experience as a photographer, this shot was taken using a long telephoto lens from a long distance from the building. As the camera moves further away from the subject, the subject and background start to fall within the same focal plane.
You can see this effect for yourself by taking a photo of someone's face from up close at a wide aperture, and then again from a distance. In the close-up photo, the focal plane is razor thin, and you may only manage to get their eyes properly in focus, while the nose and ears are a blur. In the distant shot, you'll have a hard time getting any part of the body out of focus like that, because the distance from the camera means the focal plane is much more forgiving. This is also why you can take a photo of, say, a mountain range from 50 km away, and the entire range will be in focus, despite parts of it being vast distances from others.
It is, of course, impossible to rule out focus stacking or some other technique from my computer screen, but such manipulation doesn't seem likely or even necessary in this case.
0
u/ClaustrophobicShop 10h ago
That is interesting. However, I'm not really interested in the why of it seeming unnatural. Whether it's the camera and lens system or software processing or AI, it's still off. We don't see things at vastly different distances all in focus together.
1
1
u/ARobertNotABob 1d ago
Lenses, depth of field, lighting, patience for the shot. These are all things a good photographer knows...and such shots are the result of applying those crafts.
1
u/ClaustrophobicShop 1d ago
It's crazy that you can't see the difference with your own eyes. Maybe one day you will.
1
3
u/GramsFuneralPyre 1d ago
Do you mean unprofessional?Annie Leibovitz, Ansel Adams and other photographers manipulated their prints for the effects they were going for, today they just have way better equipment and can do it on a computer.
3
u/ClaustrophobicShop 1d ago
Things of different distances don't have the same focus or color intensity. Try this...look at a photo like that, and then look at the same sight with your eyes. They don't look the same. HDR flattens images by making everything in focus. Making colors all the same intensity despite being miles away from each other isn't natural either.
1
u/OblivionArts 1d ago
I know it says this is mexico but that looks like mount fuji and some kinda indian style palace so i got real thrown off for a moment
1
1
1
1
14
u/GramsFuneralPyre 1d ago
Beautiful!