Aug 28 2006
Too funny. You can clearly see the area where a microphone chord has been taken out of this photo. You can see the coloring changes on the far wall where the cord was. Wonder why? Probably to clean up the shot – but it is such a childish effort. The NY Times probably can’t afford professional services anymore. H/T Drudge.
Update: Allahpundit at Hot Air has bought into a wild theory from DU to explain the photo. Needless to say I am not buying it – here is my comment on the post:
Sorry Allah, but there is no way the mic cord was moving that much up top and absolutely still above the ground. I would believe that theory if the cord’s movement was all the way to the ground – maybe. I use cords like this and that kind of motion would have travelled to the ground at least. Plus, the singer would have had something out of focus herself to move the cord in this manner. And why are there no other ‘blurs’ from other movements? Either the photo would blur easily (because the mic phone ‘haze’ is thin and thus shows a slow motion) or the chord is moving incredibly fast (which means the singer must be doing SOMETHING to create short, but high frequency movements). The faster the cord moves the more it would move side to side.
Sorry, the DU alibi is DUmb.
The physics of just doesn’t add up. I could be wrong…
Update: OK, I am rethinking my doubts on this. I find it hard to believe the cable alone was moving that fast and the singer wasn’t – but it is not impossible. A lucky click of the camera when the mic cord is pulled up a few inches by raising the mic’s end itself could cause the blur. I see no reason not to believe the photographer. Mea Culpa!