Earth

  • 27 Replies
  • 3626 Views
?

Sorry

Earth
« on: April 20, 2010, 11:10:20 AM »
It's round. Sorry to burst your bubble but if its perfectly flat how come this pic shows the curvature of the earth.

If its flat than ireland should be in Dubai and its clearly not any FLAT map will show that.



If it's flat why a horizion? why have i not fallen off it yet?

The sun is NOT the size of luxembourg



I cant see europe or the rest of africa because it's on the fucking other side of the....what? disc? no globe. So theres just a one flat ring foing around the planet where i can look down bowth flanks of the earth? unlikely.

If it was flat it would be a ninner plate. buy a globe and like it.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Earth
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2010, 11:44:38 AM »
It's round. Sorry to burst your bubble but if its perfectly flat how come this pic shows the curvature of the earth.

If its flat than ireland should be in Dubai and its clearly not any FLAT map will show that.



If it's flat why a horizion? why have i not fallen off it yet?

The sun is NOT the size of luxembourg



I cant see europe or the rest of africa because it's on the fucking other side of the....what? disc? no globe. So theres just a one flat ring foing around the planet where i can look down bowth flanks of the earth? unlikely.

If it was flat it would be a ninner plate. buy a globe and like it.

[FE'er]Lurk moar.[/FE'er]

*

Lorddave

  • 16782
Re: Earth
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2010, 01:13:54 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16862
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Earth
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2010, 01:16:38 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.
Quantum Ab Hoc

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2010, 01:21:17 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2010, 01:23:56 PM »
It's round. Sorry to burst your bubble but if its perfectly flat how come this pic shows the curvature of the earth.

If its flat than ireland should be in Dubai and its clearly not any FLAT map will show that.

Do you honeslty belive that as soon as a fish-eye lens is used, everything seen in that picture is of perfect proportion?


If it's flat why a horizion? why have i not fallen off it yet?
Read the FAQ about the horizon. Then understand that you haven't fallen off yet because you aren't at the edge.

The sun is NOT the size of luxembourg
Do you have any proof for this outlandish claim?



I cant see europe or the rest of africa because it's on the fucking other side of the....what? disc? no globe. So theres just a one flat ring foing around the planet where i can look down bowth flanks of the earth? unlikely.
This image is fabricated. In no way is that even a real life photo of earth.

If it was flat it would be a ninner plate. buy a globe and like it.
wth is a ninner plate?
« Last Edit: April 21, 2010, 02:36:03 AM by Jack »

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2010, 01:27:43 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #7 on: April 20, 2010, 01:29:19 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.

?

Rob Valensky

  • 131
  • 9.8m/sē
Re: Earth
« Reply #8 on: April 20, 2010, 01:33:33 PM »
The first image is just like showing (from Eiffel Tower):



It proves nothing.

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2010, 01:35:41 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2010, 01:37:21 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2010, 01:39:55 PM »
Also, since when was creating a picture of a round earth, image doctoring?


?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2010, 01:40:47 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.
So, the majority of people just use a word to mean something, and yet they're all entirely wrong and have no clue?

Jut because they don't know how to use it, doesn't mean the word isn't valid. Languages evolve. Ever use the word 'google' to mean "Look it up on a search engine?" Then you're a culprit of the exact same thing. For the third and hopefully final time:

Get over it.

Also, since when was creating a picture of a round earth, image doctoring?


If they proclaim to have used a 3D model to place 2d images onto, they will have had to distort these images somewhat in order to place them on. I've explained this in detail before but put simply:

2d images don't fit on 3d models without distortion.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2010, 01:44:24 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.
So, the majority of people just use a word to mean something, and yet they're all entirely wrong and have no clue?

Jut because they don't know how to use it, doesn't mean the word isn't valid. Languages evolve. Ever use the word 'google' to mean "Look it up on a search engine?" Then you're a culprit of the exact same thing. For the third and hopefully final time:

Get over it.

Quote
Also, since when was creating a picture of a round earth, image doctoring?

Get a clue. You think you know everything but you don't.

When people say "Google [something]" They dont go to yahoo to search it. They go to google.

When people say "This picture of earth is photoshopped" is it really photoshopped?

Get a clue.

*

Lorddave

  • 16782
Re: Earth
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2010, 01:46:02 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.
So, the majority of people just use a word to mean something, and yet they're all entirely wrong and have no clue?

Jut because they don't know how to use it, doesn't mean the word isn't valid. Languages evolve. Ever use the word 'google' to mean "Look it up on a search engine?" Then you're a culprit of the exact same thing. For the third and hopefully final time:

Get over it.

Also, since when was creating a picture of a round earth, image doctoring?


If they proclaim to have used a 3D model to place 2d images onto, they will have had to distort these images somewhat in order to place them on. I've explained this in detail before but put simply:

2d images don't fit on 3d models without distortion.

That's why, when you create a 3D texture, you do very specific texture maps which leaves huge holes in the 2D image.
Usually both though.
I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2010, 01:47:27 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.
So, the majority of people just use a word to mean something, and yet they're all entirely wrong and have no clue?

Jut because they don't know how to use it, doesn't mean the word isn't valid. Languages evolve. Ever use the word 'google' to mean "Look it up on a search engine?" Then you're a culprit of the exact same thing. For the third and hopefully final time:

Get over it.

Quote
Also, since when was creating a picture of a round earth, image doctoring?

Get a clue. You think you know everything but you don't.

When people say "Google [something]" They dont go to yahoo to search it. They go to google.

When people say "This picture of earth is photoshopped" is it really photoshopped?

Get a clue.
Why did you quote yourself in response to an answer, when I answered the question in your own quote?

Surrounded by a pack of retards.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2010, 01:51:35 PM »
2fst4u, you need to chill. Im only messing with you.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2010, 01:55:01 PM by Jack »

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Earth
« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2010, 01:54:48 PM »
Let's keep it civil, please.

?

fbkj

  • 150
Re: Earth
« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2010, 01:55:10 PM »
That looks like a wide angle fisheye lens.

It would show a curvature no matter where you were standing.
This.  And the second shot is shopped.

I suppose you have some data to back that up?
It's self proclaimed. Get over it.

Not everything is photoshopped. There are other softwares out there too.
Modern society accepts the use of photoshop as a verb to indicate image doctoring.

Get over it.

No, not modern society. Just you noobs that have no clue.

I do alot of CGI work and photoshop doesn't even touch it.

yet the CGI folks I use do use photoshop

being said photoshop has transcended brand in the english language to mean image doctoring... not sure what the fuss is about

?

Rob Valensky

  • 131
  • 9.8m/sē
Re: Earth
« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2010, 01:58:10 PM »
The thread is as good as dead. You guys are arguing over nonsense crap.

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2010, 01:58:53 PM »
Image doctoring and Image creation are two different things.

2fst4you is assuming that "shopped" is the term that modern society uses for both of those.

?

fbkj

  • 150
Re: Earth
« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2010, 02:00:01 PM »
alright bowing out of this wankerfest

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2010, 02:02:01 PM »
The thread These forums are as good as dead. You guys are arguing over nonsense crap.
fixed

?

frozen_berries

  • 633
  • Posts: 78231234
Re: Earth
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2010, 02:03:02 PM »
The thread These forums are as good as dead. You guys are arguing over nonsense crap.
fixed

Now that is something I can agree on.  8)

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: Earth
« Reply #24 on: April 20, 2010, 06:03:21 PM »
2d images don't fit on 3d models without distortion.


That all depends on:

A) how many 2d images there are.
B) how many faces the model has.

Unless your are arguing about the North and South poles of Google Earth, that's not distortion to make them fit - but distortion, from close reference points, because that's how they fit.

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #25 on: April 20, 2010, 06:41:30 PM »
2d images don't fit on 3d models without distortion.


That all depends on:

A) how many 2d images there are.
B) how many faces the model has.

Unless your are arguing about the North and South poles of Google Earth, that's not distortion to make them fit - but distortion, from close reference points, because that's how they fit.
No, I don't want to get into it too much as I've explained it before and nobody understood it.

Photo of 3d object creates a 2d [distorted] version (Not the fact that it's on a flat piece of paper, but more the fact that things like countries disappearing behind the horizon are squashed. The photo of the country has captured a distorted image of the object at the edges.)

Then placing those 2d object onto the 3d model requires further distortion. Sure, if done well it might cancel it out but there's no saying that it has.

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: Earth
« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2010, 06:43:06 PM »
Photo of 3d object creates a 2d [distorted] version (Not the fact that it's on a flat piece of paper, but more the fact that things like countries disappearing behind the horizon are squashed. The photo of the country has captured a distorted image of the object at the edges.)

Needs more images.

which is point A)


Would you agree that photos of the ground 1mm x 1mm in size would not be influenced by your distortion?

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: Earth
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2010, 07:04:15 PM »
Photo of 3d object creates a 2d [distorted] version (Not the fact that it's on a flat piece of paper, but more the fact that things like countries disappearing behind the horizon are squashed. The photo of the country has captured a distorted image of the object at the edges.)

Needs more images.

which is point A)


Would you agree that photos of the ground 1mm x 1mm in size would not be influenced by your distortion?
Of the earth, yes it would be negligible. It's all about scale.