1/25/2006: Gateway arch shadow projection

xoB finds this person's page of pictures and suggests this particular one... I agree. I had not seen before how the very bright spotlights on the St. Louis Gateway Arch create a "bat signal" on the clouds above. It's very striking! The photographer bothers to capture the moon through the clouds at exactly the right point. Good work, that.

Quick, someone call...Archman? :worried:

Beautiful image.

I appreciate the artistic talent shown by the photographer, but I admire more the powers of observation. Who looks upward to find shadows? Wonderful!

I thought you were going to show this image, but yours is better.

I'm sure it is because of my relative proximity, but the Gateway Arch is the one "major landmark" to which I've been more than once. IIRC, I've been up in the thing about six times in my life, and I'll never get tired of it. Hell, the first time I went up, they hadn't even constructed the Westward Expansion Memorial Museum beneath it. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I've ever been to St. Louis when I haven't gone up in the majestic structure. It is definitely an experience I can recommend.

BigV wrote:

Beautiful image.

I appreciate the artistic talent shown by the photographer, but I admire more the powers of observation. Who looks upward to find shadows? Wonderful!

Well, if someone had the foresight to look up with the intent of searching for the shadows, then I would commend them too. However, since the arch is ABOVE one's head, and you HAVE to look up to see the arch if you're standing underneath it, I suspect that it's something that a good number of 'average-observing-skill' people could detect.

i think that even though more than person may have seen it, this guy's still got the photographer's eye. the composition's amazing. and taking a good photo in the dark is not as easy as doing so in the daytime.

mlandman wrote:

Well, if someone had the foresight to look up with the intent of searching for the shadows, then I would commend them too. However, since the arch is ABOVE one's head, and you HAVE to look up to see the arch if you're standing underneath it, I suspect that it's something that a good number of 'average-observing-skill' people could detect.

Yeah, I don't think there's anyone who has visited this monument and failed to look up at it. No bonus points there. I reckon there have been many people visit in the nighttime too, who also look up. But I credit the photographer's powers of observation for bringing together in one frame what many thousands, perhaps millions, have seen, but not noticed.

On the other hand, I could be all wrong. Maybe it's a boring old picture of the arch. Or of the moon. Or some dumb ol' clouds and stuff. Maybe I'm just projecting my thoughts on the photographer. Maybe he was just lucky. As when preparation meets opportunity. Yeah, very lucky.

Regardless, it is a lovely photograph, and I applaud his skill.

I love it. Great pic. I've been to the arch several times mostly at night. I never saw the shadows. That's what makes a great photographer imo is seeing what most of us overlook while looking at the same subject.
The arch itself is a work also. The tallest memorial in the US standing at 630 ft made mostly of stainless steel. WOW.

Actually, I bet the shadows are all but invisible unless you do the long exposure necessary for a nighttime shot.

And clouds or fog low enough to project shadows on.
He does have a good eye as the rest of his site shows. ;)

Can anyone in Washington DC on a cloudy night verify whether the Washington Monument casts X-shaped shadows upward?

I've seen the Washington Monument at night many many times, but don't remember ever seeing any light pattern projected onto the clouds. I've seen bright haze around the top of the monument, but that's it.

I think that it's rare for this type of thing to happen. You have to have the perfect conditions. The air has to be clear down low, with heavy cloud cover at just the right altitude. The clouds need to be the kind that blanket an area, but aren't all irregularly shaped. It may only happen a handful of nights each year. Then you need someone to notice it and take a picture of it.

The photographer was lucky to be in the right place at the right time. The photographer was skilled to get the exposure right (nighttime photography is difficult to do) and the composition is good too, which may be skill, or may be luck.

The picture is a good one.

Bat signal? You sure about that?

that's pretty tite