Borg said:
I've been trying to find where that might be without luck. I have found
a reference to it in 2017 which pre-dates the image generators of today.
That might rule out AI. But Photoshop (or similar) and ray tracing have been around for decades.
Borg said:
I also found a
reddit thread where someone claims that it's a bridge to a tram on the University of Washington campus but no link. Perhaps
@nsaspook knows about it?
It may be a real bridge, but with the shadows in the image manipulated in a Photoshop (or Photoshop-like) program, such that the actual shadows were replaced (via "Clone Stamp" and "Free Transform" tools) such that they wrap around the railing in ways that they do not in real-life.
Rive said:
Maybe it's painted on the road and photographed around noon when the real shadow is just short?
I never considered the shadows being "painted," But if paint is involved, where are the actual shadows?! It still doesn't make sense.
Flyboy said:
The perception that the shadows remain perpendicular to the railings is just that, a perception. I think it’s more of an optical illusion, especially when in image format instead of in person.
Assuming the rails are perpendicular to each other, then the shadows should also be perpendicular to
each other. This assumes a very far away light source and the shadows lie on a flat plane, which both appear to be.
And if it's not a flat plane, but curved in some sort of non-obvious way, there would be evidence of this in the ambient brightness. None of this appears to be the case.
You could argue that the entire architecture is designed for the effect to be seen by one and only one particular location (where the camera is) and only at one particular time of day and one particular day of the year. That seems quite overboard to me (from a modern, architectural sense).
Flyboy said:
As for the sharpness of the shadows… those also look pretty normal to me. Maybe it’s just the quality of the image, but I don’t see any unusually sharp edges to the shadows.
There's no falloff in sharpness of the shadows in the image. In a real situation, the shadows would be sharper to the left side, when the shadows are nearer the base of the railing, and then get fuzzier as the distance to the railing increases. There is no such sharpness falloff in the image: The shadows are uniformly sharp. That shouldn't happen in real life.
======================
Edit: See my post #1885, a few posts down from here. I've changed my mind on a few things.