Late for my bus. Images of Canberra.

I did come across another Roo photo in the archives. http://the-riotact.com/the-amazing-jumping-kangaroo/7531

Here is my only Gimped photo……. http://the-riotact.com/the-lake-hosts-rescue-training/21506 Obvious.

Fess up now if you got one past us…..

00davist said :

RedDogInCan said :

All this talk about photoshopping suggests a theme for a photo competition to produce the most realistic yet implausible photo related to Canberra. Maybe even a paid up membership as a prize?

I’ll vote for this idea!!!

Photoshop what a RA contributors look like for the curios. “A troll at home in Canberra”.

A few years ago, when the drought was at its height, I saw a big grey hopping around the lower lawns of (new) Parliament House. It is one of the delights of living in Canberra.

Nice pic. And yes, agree it’s a cheeky adolescent that probably told Mum he was going to the library, but is actually meeting some pals to do some Xtreme skateboarding.

RedDogInCan said :

All this talk about photoshopping suggests a theme for a photo competition to produce the most realistic yet implausible photo related to Canberra. Maybe even a paid up membership as a prize?

I’ll vote for this idea!!!

EvanJames said :

I think that’s a boy roo. Youngish one who’d like to be Top Roo… you know when they’ve made it, they muscle right up.

I agree that it’s a young-un.

Once they are old enough to get their Drivers License no self respecting roo would ever be seen catching a bus.

She skipped out on paying the bus fare because the bus driver was roo’d…

Brilliant. Perhaps Skippy needed to catch the bus to go and tell Matt that Sonny was lost in the bush again, or trapped, or held by villains, or sick, or drowning in the river, or bitten by a snake, or ……..

All this talk about photoshopping suggests a theme for a photo competition to produce the most realistic yet implausible photo related to Canberra. Maybe even a paid up membership as a prize?

Any of you doubters are welcome to the original RAW image if you give me an e-mail address.

Definately photoshopped, you don’t see bus shelters like that just on the side of the road these days 🙂

The lighting looks fine to me and the DOF is quite large which is normal for anything but dSLRs. The roo has a slight blur due to it actually moving. Some people are just jealous of others 🙂

Its not the most technical or artistic photo, but a cool photo all the same.nd one that requires luck and skill to get.

Waiting For Godot said :

troll-sniffer said :

Definitely photoshopped. The light on the roo is a different angle to the rerst of the scene. The kangaroo is sharper than the rest of the photo. There’s no shadow under the kangaroo. The positioning of the animal is where it’s easiest to paste in the kangaroo and blend in the edges.

I knew this pic was fake the moment I saw it. I don’t know anything about Photoshop but the lighting and contrast – as well as the lack of depth of field – was a giveaway. It just doesn’t look right.

You might be able to get away with a pic like this in the print edition of a newspaper but on a computer screen, where sharpness, resolution and brilliance is far superior, it won’t pass muster at all. Especially when you are dealing with the cluey and geeky crowd who inhabit sites like this on the Net.

Geez, the conspircy continues!!!

Slow day at are 51 ey guys?

troll-sniffer said :

Definitely photoshopped. The light on the roo is a different angle to the rerst of the scene. The kangaroo is sharper than the rest of the photo. There’s no shadow under the kangaroo. The positioning of the animal is where it’s easiest to paste in the kangaroo and blend in the edges.

I knew this pic was fake the moment I saw it. I don’t know anything about Photoshop but the lighting and contrast – as well as the lack of depth of field – was a giveaway. It just doesn’t look right.

You might be able to get away with a pic like this in the print edition of a newspaper but on a computer screen, where sharpness, resolution and brilliance is far superior, it won’t pass muster at all. Especially when you are dealing with the cluey and geeky crowd who inhabit sites like this on the Net.

I think that’s a boy roo. Youngish one who’d like to be Top Roo… you know when they’ve made it, they muscle right up.

Jivrashia said :

dvaey said :

and skippy would probably get where he’s going faster

*spits the dummy*
Okay, when did Skip get a SEX CHANGE??

Probably the same time the when the photoshop application was applied 😉

dvaey said :

and skippy would probably get where he’s going faster

*spits the dummy*
Okay, when did Skip get a SEX CHANGE??

For those who aren’t photo nerds following this the discussion is about the use of filters v. complete fabrication in photoshop.

There are legitimate artistic photoshop uses, and then there’s making things up.

Actually, maybe photoshop is needed a bit more for this one, Can we get a copy of this photo with a few roo’s poking out from the stop, maybe one out the window.

One has to be holding a ticket, and maybe even one out the back of the stop having a quick smoke before the bus comes…

Oh, and one driving past…oh and…

Ben_Dover said :

Oh I’ll happily admit it’s photoshopped.
BTW, does anyone NOT photoshop (or gimp ect) their images these days? The digital darkroom makes digital photography worthwhile.

As a photographer for 43 odd years now, IMHO digital solved what had been an almost intractable problem of film, the inability to match the eye’s capacity to resolve contrasting light levels. Ansel Adams and co more or less solved it but they had to lug around large plate cameras and make long calculations, as well as be masters of the dodge in the darkroom.

With the feather tool in PS and whichever of the levels tools I choose to use, I can actually get sunlit areas and shadows in the same photo more or less approximating what my eye can resolve. Film was either or, unless I spent ages in the darkroom. Now, it’s a simple matter of set the levels to suit the highlights, then select feather of 100 pixels, use the outline tool to delineate the shadow areas (as rough an outline as I like, with a large feather there’s plenty of headroom, then use curves, levels or brightness and contrast to lighten the shadows etc, and within a few seconds I can have a good result.

Photoshop does offer the highlight shadow tool as well but its effects past a certain minimal point look strange to me. Lots of examples of the filter on real estate sites but they all look weird.

troll-sniffer said :

Definitely photoshopped. The light on the roo is a different angle to the rerst of the scene. The kangaroo is sharper than the rest of the photo. There’s no shadow under the kangaroo. The positioning of the animal is where it’s easiest to paste in the kangaroo and blend in the edges.

(Submitted on behalf of the Canberra chapter of the Moon Landings Were a Hoax Society)

More like the Mr Magoo Society if you ask me.

As an aside, I’ve had a kangaroo hop past my front door at my old house in Nicholls and also my current inner north abode. Neither were trying to catch a bus though. Mind the more recent one may have been hit by a bus, the poor bugger wasn’t in a good shape and was in no mood for hanging around when we tried to assist.

johnboy said :

Stevian said :

It’s not that rare a sight,

Get the photograph in focus and send it in champ.

+1. I’m a photographer and it’s not as easy as people think to get shots like these.

I always clean up my photos… crop, level adjustment can often improve the colours and it’s quick, sharpening often makes things look better… pretty standard with most pictures.

00davist said :

Yes, but this guys having sooo much fun with his comspiricy theory, and after all, we all know how much you have been Dying to post a photo of a roo at a bus stop, and that this forgery is your launchpad to a lucrative business designing bus stops for wildlife!

A-a-a-a-a-g-h! NooOOoOOo!! You’ve given my cunning plan away now, they’ll all be at it!

Ben_Dover said :

Ben_Dover said :

Oh I’ll happily admit it’s photoshopped. It’s warmed, cropped, and sharpened, slight boost contrast using curves and red/yellow saturation boosted.

I have about a dozen more of that roo around the Bus stop.

Fixed that for me.

BTW, does anyone NOT photoshop (or gimp ect) their images these days? The digital darkroom makes digital photography worthwhile.

I am involved with a few forums to do with vintage machenery, and I post a heck of alot of photo’s on those, I dont think i have really posted any photo’s that have not been enhanced and cropped to highlight the specific point in question, or to make them a reasonable file size for the forums server.

Ben_Dover said :

Oh I’ll happily admit it’s photoshopped. It’s warmed, cropped, and sharpened, slight boost contrast using curves and red/yellow saturation boosted.

I have about a dozen more of that roo around the Bus stop.

Fixed that for me.

BTW, does anyone NOT photoshop (or gimp ect) their images these days? The digital darkroom makes digital photography worthwhile.

Ben_Dover said :

Oh I’ll happily admit it’s photoshopped. It’s warmed, cropped, and sharpened, sleigh boost contrast using curves and red/yellow saturation boosted.

I have about a dozen more of that roo around the Bus stop.

Yes, but this guys having sooo much fun with his comspiricy theory, and after all, we all know how much you have been Dying to post a photo of a roo at a bus stop, and that this forgery is your launchpad to a lucrative business designing bus stops for wildlife!

troll-sniffer said :

Definitely photoshopped. The light on the roo is a different angle to the rerst of the scene. The kangaroo is sharper than the rest of the photo. There’s no shadow under the kangaroo. The positioning of the animal is where it’s easiest to paste in the kangaroo and blend in the edges.

(Submitted on behalf of the Canberra chapter of the Moon Landings Were a Hoax Society)

I believe that the correct interwebs phraseology is:

“THIS LOOKS SHOOPED, I CAN TELL FROM SOME OF THE PIXELS AND FROM SEEING QUITE A FEW SHOOPS IN MY TIME.”

Oh I’ll happily admit it’s photoshopped. It’s warmed, cropped, and sharpened, sleigh boost contrast using curves and red/yellow saturation boosted.

I have about a dozen more of that roo around the Bus stop.

Definitely photoshopped. The light on the roo is a different angle to the rerst of the scene. The kangaroo is sharper than the rest of the photo. There’s no shadow under the kangaroo. The positioning of the animal is where it’s easiest to paste in the kangaroo and blend in the edges.

(Submitted on behalf of the Canberra chapter of the Moon Landings Were a Hoax Society)

Stevian said :

It’s not that rare a sight,

Get the photograph in focus and send it in champ.

It’s not that rare a sight,

Chances are the bus is running late, and skippy would probably get where he’s going faster by hopping than by catching an ACTION bus anyway.

Glad to see those cylindrical bus stops are still around. I hesitate to call them shelters as they were alway cunningly and precisely sited so as to capture every skerrick of breeze, from an eddy to a gale, that might have been around.