Lightning Inside of a WaterSpout..Unbelievable Picture

I'm solidly in the "motion blur" group now, having studied the image and all the posts about it. The arc motion would be consistent with the motion of the camera created by triggering the shutter. The S3 Pro has .05 sec shutter lag (between triggering the shutter and beginning the exposure.) The lightning was striking at a rate of about 1 bolt every 8 or 10 seconds, so I was just holding the camera with the shutter button partly depressed, and hitting the trigger when the sky lit up. A lot of the bolts were multiple strikes, where the arc takes the same path repeatedly, so I managed to get several strikes captured within the 10 minutes or so that I was shooting the event. Normally I would set the shutter for 5 to 30 seconds and shoot with small aperture. On this evening, it was still twilight in the area that I was shooting, so I used a medium aperture for better overall sharpness.

No one has mentioned that in the ground contact area, there is no area of the ground or pole that "front lighted" by the bolt. The whole area is a silhouette, which means that the lightning was beyond the first trees, possibly hitting the road, a sign, a car or tree on the other side of the road. Where the light goes across in front of the power pole, the pole is not lit up in the surrounding area, which definitely suggests that camera motion caused the effect. It's exactly what I would expect to see if I triggered the shutter while swinging the camera.
Here's an example of the technique, from my D P Challenge portfolio.
D P Challenge portfolio image

Originally posted by MelonMusketeer
I'm solidly in the "motion blur" group now, having studied the image and all the posts about it. The arc motion would be consistent with the motion of the camera created by triggering the shutter.

that's what it looks like from the low resolution image but since you have the full resolution image to look at that would give you more information.

No one has mentioned that in the ground contact area, there is no area of the ground or pole that "front lighted" by the bolt. The whole area is a silhouette, which means that the lightning was beyond the first trees, possibly hitting the road, a sign, a car or tree on the other side of the road. Where the light goes across in front of the power pole, the pole is not lit up in the surrounding area, which definitely suggests that camera motion caused the effect.

After watching the now famous illusion in the STS-75 video, I don't always draw the conclusion that an object that looks like it's behind another object really is, especially if it's a light. But it sounds like you're saying you think the lightning was behind the power pole and not in front of it? That's also what my guess is too.

wow that is a rare pic, never herd of this before.

Wow, what a great picture!! S&F I love lightening pictures. Here is one of mine.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/94c43062d04c.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by CHRLZ
I agree - I think the effect of a strike in/on a waterspout would be 'marked', to say the least. In fact I also suspect that the reason such a thing has never been captured is that it would probably demolish the spout at both ends, and possibly the bolt would simply be dissipated or redirected. And of course if the (salt)waterspout is in operation, there is *already* a reasonably good conductor (way better than air) in place, and so maybe there would be no arc at all, just some other sort of slower, gentler conduction of the charge.

But I'm no expert on lightning, so these are w-a-guesses..!

A spout would be a very good attractor for lightning and would be hit before it got close to the charged clouds. The energy in a typical lightning strike would immediately turn the spout into a lot of hydrogen, oxygen and vapour.

There isn't really a 'gentle' discharge with lightning because the potential is so high.

"Motion blur" is fine for the lighting bolt up to a point. If "motion blur" is the cause, then the blur has given the lightning bolt four facets. From left to right, (1) a darker area, (2) the bolt itself, (3) another darker area and (4) another lighter area, (or highlighted area). The pylon, on the other hand is more or less the same in width as the other pylons in the picture. Of course, the width of the pylon could be diminished by the background light from the bolt. The pylon looks to be solid, and there are no discernable added facets to the left or right in the same way as the lightning bolt, if you accept the notion of "motion blur". It has to be said also that a waterspout is mentioned by the photographer. All in all, an interesting picture...like the Norway spiral.

The problem I am having is that i could recreate that, probably even better looking then that, in photoshop.

reply to post by smurfy

The photographer saw no waterspout(s). He assumed it was present because waterspouts are sometimes associated with thunderstorms.

Lightning strikes are not a single instantaneous event. More than "motion blur", I think "time lapse" is probably a more accurate description.Restrike

Look at how the bolt moves in this video.


[edit on 5/28/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by smurfy

 

The photographer saw no waterspout(s). He assumed it was present because waterspouts are sometimes associated with thunderstorms.

Lightning strikes are not a single instantaneous event. More than "motion blur", I think "time lapse" is probably a more accurate description.Restrike

Look at how the bolt moves in this video.

[edit on 5/28/2010 by Phage]

In the post I read, the photographer mentions earlier photos of the waterspout forming. I like your video however, it shows the "drift" of a lightning bolt and its speed drift implicitly. It also shows that the bolt nicked a piece of the tower it struck, that is interesting too.

reply to post by smurfy

I don't think so. But I haven't seen the second photo. Have we?
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 5/28/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage

Lightning strikes are not a single instantaneous event. More than "motion blur", I think "time lapse" is probably a more accurate description.Restrike

Look at how the bolt moves in this video.

[edit on 5/28/2010 by Phage]

Notice that at the end of the strike in the video, the bolt breaks up into bright globs.
I think that is what is seen as the streaks of light crossing the power pole, and in the middle of the bolt in the original photo because the width of the light is just too uniform. I don't think that the bolt of lightning moved in the photo. This would continue to be a mystery if the pole hadn't lined up exactly with the strike.