4 ms·
That is, unfortunately, not always the case. Long exposure photography used in photos of nature often lend an unrealistic view of (enter beautiful place here).
by Broken_Hippo 3y ago
That is, unfortunately, not always the case. Long exposure photography used in photos of nature often lend an unrealistic view of (enter beautiful place here). Basically, photoshop for nature.
You wind up with folks visiting the grand canyon and feeling let down because it was nowhere near as beautiful as the photos.
It doesn't mean the travel isn't worth it or that you didn't have a nice trip, but it wasn't really what one hoped for.
- mcphage 3y agoI did feel let down by the Grand Canyon, but not because of photos. You visit a bunch of stop along the rim, but since it’s so wide, the view from each stop looks pretty similar. It’s beautiful, but when you go to the third or fourth place, it does become somewhat familiar. This doesn’t hold for walking down into the canyon, though—that was amazing.
- chx 3y agoThis very much happens with aurora borealis.
- lupusreal 3y agoIt does. But it's also the case that people often witness very weak examples of aurora borealis during their short vacations north and then assume it's always like that and all the photos are long exposure or otherwise enhanced. This is a mistaken impression, sometimes aurora borealis really is very bright and vivid. But for those occasions to coincide with your vacation requires a fair bit of luck.