Shooting light beams

D

Dannhy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
81
Name
Daniel
Edit My Images
Yes
you'd need some sort of Dust or mist in order to get that naturally, otherwise you'd be adding it in post processing.
 
Ahh right well I don't like photoshopping pictures so there would have to be dust

I am picturing a car under the street light but in order to achieve this there would need to be dust in the air
 
Or a windless night with a smoke machine or haze machine rented.
 
Dannhy said:
Ahh right well I don't like photoshopping pictures so there would have to be dust

I am picturing a car under the street light but in order to achieve this there would need to be dust in the air
Click to expand...


Or mist. Any particulate in the air. Light, by definition, can not be "seen". You only see light when it hits something.
 
But you wouldn't want chalk dust near the car, and it won't hang in the air as long as long lasting smoke from the smoke machine would.
 
I think it would probably best to just wait for a misty night rather than messing about with chalk or smoke :)
 
and im curious, how is the definition of light involved?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rapscallion said:
Yeah. Your eye, silly!!

:exit:
Click to expand...

but only when the light waves/particles hit the receptors in the back of your eye... :lol:

Rapscallion said:
and im curious, how is the definition of light involved?
Click to expand...

My understanding of photography is that it is the manipulation/understanding of light captured to portray an image of that moment in time. The definition of light goes a long way to beginning to understand how light works, and thus how you can then manipulate it... :naughty: :whistling:
 
Rapscallion said:
Yeah. Your eye, silly!!

:exit:
Click to expand...

You must have a very confusing view of the world if you can see light. Most (all?) humans can't.
 
Hmmmm..... The most obvious examples of visible "light beams" in the OP's link are both taken from 2nd Life which is (IIRC) a completely computer generated "landscape" with but a tenuous link to the real world! However, the pool of light under a streetlight is a fact of modern life and can be used to good effect as a light source. Beware of the older, yellow lights - they have a very narrow spectrum and the cast they introduce is a PITA to deal with!
 
Phil V said:
You must have a very confusing view of the world if you can see light. Most (all?) humans can't.
Click to expand...

?

Light (ie photons) hits the retina, and through a long chain of chemical and electrical happenings result in us perceiving an image somewhere in the brain.

I think our eyes would be redundant without light...!

But seriously, i understand we cannot indirectly see light. I was always confused when people said 'we cannot see light'. What on earth does our retina react to if it isn't light?
 
Rapscallion said:
?

Light (ie photons) hits the retina, and through a long chain of chemical and electrical happenings result in us perceiving an image somewhere in the brain.

I think our eyes would be redundant without light...!

But seriously, i understand we cannot indirectly see light. I was always confused when people said 'we cannot see light'. What on earth does our retina react to if it isn't light?
Click to expand...

But you don't see the light, you only see the objects it reflects off. Which is back to the OP's dilemma, you can't see the beam of light that he wants to capture, unless there's enough contamination in the atmosphere to make it visible (i.e. something for the light to bounce off).:shrug:
 
Phil V said:
But you don't see the light, you only see the objects it reflects off. Which is back to the OP's dilemma, you can't see the beam of light that he wants to capture, unless there's enough contamination in the atmosphere to make it visible (i.e. something for the light to bounce off).:shrug:
Click to expand...

Phil, i agree with what you say, which must mean i've explained myself poorly above...
 
Rapscallion said:
Yeah. Your eye, silly!!

:exit:
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you're joking :)


Light can not be seen. Shine the brightest light you can image in the hard vacuum of space, and you'll see nothing until it hits something else... including your eye's retina :)


george g said:
They gave the Nobel prize to the physicist that found a way to see light...

http://gizmodo.com/5950469/how-can-we-see-light

:thumbs:
Click to expand...


Even that is not allowing you to see light. It's a way to measure whether light is present without the need for it to hit something.... you still can't see it.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
But you don't see the light, you only see the objects it reflects off. Which is back to the OP's dilemma, you can't see the beam of light that he wants to capture, unless there's enough contamination in the atmosphere to make it visible (i.e. something for the light to bounce off).:shrug:
Click to expand...

You see the wavelengths of light not absorbed by objects and reflected into your eyes.

If you look directly at the source of light you will see it.
 
But are you seeing the light or the transmitter?
 
POAH said:
If you look directly at the source of light you will see it.
Click to expand...

No you're not... you're seeing the effects of the photons hitting your retina. You are not seeing the light. Light is just photons... they are not visible.
 
Shee, what next? People thinking that oxygen burns easily?
 
It does get a bit like a playground in here alright.


I could easily get why someone would say you can see light. You may not be able to see it direct. But you can see reflected light. Not hard to comprehend.
 
of course you can see light ,, i know because ive seen it ..halleljah ,brotherly,,brotherly ,,,
im just going outside to look at the wind now ,,,,,,,:D
 
Cagey75 said:
It does get a bit like a playground in here alright.


I could easily get why someone would say you can see light. You may not be able to see it direct. But you can see reflected light. Not hard to comprehend.
Click to expand...

Yay, somebody gets it!
 
Just trying to be clear, as there's a common misconception that you need really bright light to get a "beam" of light, but that then causes all manner of exposure and contrast issues. You actually just need "stuff" in the air for the light to hit and you can actually use much lower amounts of light and get better images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top