Under the Dome

[pdk42]

Z6 plus 24-70. Pano stack of 5 images taken in portrait orientation.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Under the Dome by Paul Kaye, on Flickr

 

[Randy]

amazing picture, WOW !

 

[pdk42]

And for your amusement - here's a 5-shot HDR stack taken at the same time from an Olympus E-M1 ii with the Panasonic Leica 8-18mm at 8mm (16mm equiv). It's not as nice up close and I've had to work a bit harder on the PP, but still - not bad for a teeny sensor

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Under the Dome (2) by Paul Kaye, on Flickr

 

[pdk42]

amazing picture, WOW !

Thank you Randy. It was certainly a nice rainbow. 5 mins later I was drenched!

 

[Mike Buckley]

Wonderful photo! Perhaps the thread title should be Under the Double Dome. You sold yourself short by mentioning just one dome.

 

[nuclearjock]

Beautiful Paul

 

[gchappel]

Beautiful images!!
I was recently studying the physics of rainbows. The second rainbow is almost always present, it is just so dim you usually really have to look for it. It is more obvious when the sun is brighter.
The dark band between the 2 bows is called Alexander's dark band, well seen here.
Notice the colors on the second rainbow are reversed with respect to the first. On the first the red is always on the outside, but red is always on the inside of the second bow. Always.
By the way, see how bright it is beneath the first rainbow. That also is expected, and is always a part of the rainbow.
By the way rainbows can be all white, and they can be all red.
The physics of even a simple rainbow is fascinating, and knowledge lets me see and appreciate more than ever.
Gary

 

[Commodorefirst]

Nominated and featured. Great image!

 

[Randy]

it looks great on the front page here

 

[Bohdan]

So good!

 

[dossy]

Another WOW!

 

[JW53]

Very cool, like the downburst under the dome.

 

[Palouse]

As good as they come!

 

[andreasb]

Wonderful! Brings back a special memory. On our wedding day 16 years ago (this last Friday) when we came back to our new house with Ocean view there was a double rainbow over the ocean, I took a shot but nowhere as nice as this, well done!

 

[pdk42]

Beautiful images!!
I was recently studying the physics of rainbows. The second rainbow is almost always present, it is just so dim you usually really have to look for it. It is more obvious when the sun is brighter.
The dark band between the 2 bows is called Alexander's dark band, well seen here.
Notice the colors on the second rainbow are reversed with respect to the first. On the first the red is always on the outside, but red is always on the inside of the second bow. Always.
By the way, see how bright it is beneath the first rainbow. That also is expected, and is always a part of the rainbow.
By the way rainbows can be all white, and they can be all red.
The physics of even a simple rainbow is fascinating, and knowledge lets me see and appreciate more than ever.
Gary

Thanks for that. I'm a bit of a physics nut too! However, I've never really looked into rainbows in any depth - I know that the theory of them is actually quite complex.

Your comment about how the knowledge you've acquired lets you appreciate it better reminds me of that famous quote by Richard Feynman:

I have a friend who’s an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don’t agree with very well. He’ll hold up a flower and say “look how beautiful it is,” and I’ll agree. Then he says “I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing,” and I think that he’s kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe…

I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it’s not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there’s also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don’t understand how it subtracts.

 

[Palouse]

I agree, Paul. There is beauty in form and function. Even my former mathematician/statistician colleagues used to talk about the aesthetic of equations.

 

[gchappel]

There is an old saying I truly believe. Knowledge is always additive, it never takes away.
Along those lines, trying to understand the physics of rainbows never ever makes me see or appreciate less. I know see and appreciate more.
Gary

 

[Richard_M]

Great photo!

The stitching software has done a great job on the rainbow.

 

[Philinnz]

awesome shots, just a tiny nitpick on the first one, some of the pasture crop on the horizon has popped up a little

 

[Pa]

I second the accolades that have been posted above. At first I thought the extreme brightness below the inside rainbow looked artificial, like you created it in processing, but apparently it's natural as explained by Gary's research:

The dark band between the 2 bows is called Alexander's dark band, well seen here.