4 ms·

Can I complain about popular iceberg imagery? Most of the depictions of icebergs (1) that show them underwater are completely fake and like the "dead butterfly"

by tgb 9y ago

Can I complain about popular iceberg imagery? Most of the depictions of icebergs (1) that show them underwater are completely fake and like the "dead butterfly" post here recently aren't even remotely plausible. They're always shown as tall and skinny, but that's ridiculous, they'd be unstable. I've read that the classic picture is actually composited from two above-water shots, one flipped upside down and blue tinted to look underwater. Some of the images in that Google search I link are ludicrously unrealistic. (1) https://www.google.com/search?q=glacier+underwater https://www.google.com/search?q=glacier+underwater

geon 9y ago
Icebergs do become unstable, though. That's why they flip.
edent 9y ago
One of the most famous (and profitable) iceberg photos is a composite. See https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-that-has-earned-over-900k/ https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-tha... http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp
- tgb 9y ago
  That's exactly what made me realize this. Everything since then seems to have just copied that image. Of course, it partly makes sense. Icebergs are generally too large to photograph underwater clearly since visibility will probably never be that good and the lighting would be terrible, so they'll always have to be composites. Also, whoops. Why did I link to a search for "Glacier underwater" instead of "iceberg"?
StephenConnell 9y ago
That's funny. The artists impression looks like it is based on a burried rock sticking out of the dirt.
jonknee 9y ago
> They're always shown as tall and skinny, but that's ridiculous, they'd be unstable. I think icebergs are inherently unstable, that's why they're icebergs in the first place. They do also flip (see OP!). Tall skinny things are also not a bad way to go in the ocean, that's how some deep sea oil drilling platforms work[1]. Or something like the RP Flip[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_(platform) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_(platform) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP
- tgb 9y ago
  Those things aren't at near-constant density, though. And although the article shows that icebergs do flip, the fact that the Smithsonian wrote an excited piece about it suggests that it doesn't happen too frequently. And it sounds like that happens because pieces break off or melt. The examples in the image search aren't just kinda unstable; they're completely implausible.

by tgb 9y ago

geon 9y ago

Icebergs do become unstable, though. That's why they flip.

edent 9y ago

One of the most famous (and profitable) iceberg photos is a composite. See https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-that-has-earned-over-900k/ https://petapixel.com/2015/09/24/the-iceberg-stock-photo-tha... http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/iceberg.asp

tgb 9y ago
That's exactly what made me realize this. Everything since then seems to have just copied that image. Of course, it partly makes sense. Icebergs are generally too large to photograph underwater clearly since visibility will probably never be that good and the lighting would be terrible, so they'll always have to be composites. Also, whoops. Why did I link to a search for "Glacier underwater" instead of "iceberg"?

StephenConnell 9y ago

That's funny. The artists impression looks like it is based on a burried rock sticking out of the dirt.

jonknee 9y ago

> They're always shown as tall and skinny, but that's ridiculous, they'd be unstable. I think icebergs are inherently unstable, that's why they're icebergs in the first place. They do also flip (see OP!). Tall skinny things are also not a bad way to go in the ocean, that's how some deep sea oil drilling platforms work[1]. Or something like the RP Flip[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_(platform) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_(platform) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP

tgb 9y ago
Those things aren't at near-constant density, though. And although the article shows that icebergs do flip, the fact that the Smithsonian wrote an excited piece about it suggests that it doesn't happen too frequently. And it sounds like that happens because pieces break off or melt. The examples in the image search aren't just kinda unstable; they're completely implausible.