I am not a math phobic and am probably way off base but I am going to
take a stab at what I think is needed/required:
If I am using a 50mm lens (35mm film), in order to cover 400 feet on the
vertical, I would need to be about 790 feet from the 400 foot subject.
Having this as a starting point it should be no problem to size the subject
to reflect whatever distance one would want the subject to reflect. I'm
thinking the shape of these things are a big airplane propeller on a tall
shaft. Depending on the diameter of the shaft and the width of the blades,
the human eye would probably have a problem seeing anything if they were
more than a few miles off shore. Have no idea what the actual size of these
things may be but I'd think you wouldn't be able to see much beyond the 5
mile range even though they would be still visible (theoretically) above the
horizon???????????
My 2 cents
Walter Mayes
Hi, I received the following inquiry or request for assistance. I think
this is
something
valid to consider. There are several approaches to the solution. If you
were
asked this
question how would you answer? Several faculty members at RIT could not
answer
this though!!
----------------------- begin -------------------------
I'm working on a story about the proposal by the NY Power Authority to
build
wind farms in Lake
Ontario and Lake Erie. What I want to do is produce a photograph, or
series of
them, showing how the
view from the shoreline would change if 400-foot-tall turbines were
erected in
the lake.
We'd Photoshop-in the turbines (with proper disclaimers), but want the
image
to be as accurate as
possible. I'm wondering if you might might help us. We need to know how
"big"
to make the turbine
appear in the photo. Any thoughts would be helpful. Thanks.
----------------------- end -------------------------
What is needed is a step-by-step guide that anyone who by their self
admission
is math phobic. I may reveal my answer(s) if anyone is interested. andy
