OH please someone tell me whats wrong with the picture! Unbeleivable (pic)

[Das Pferd]

http://home.comcast.net/~ecksjay/****.jpg

 

[.45FMJoe]

Interesting...I at least hope the camera is sitting on a shelf, not being held by bubba.

I hope.

 

[nico]

all I can say is I hope he's using a tripod and there's a concrete wall behind it.

 

[Black Majik]

Almost dead cameraperson?

1) Finger on trigger
2) Pointing at something not willing to destroy
3) Gun is loaded with JHP.
4) Shooter is a moron that needs to see a Eddie Eagle video
5) No Eye Protection
6) No Ear protection

 

[Nick1911]

I do hope that was a re-load with no power or primer...

Still... I don't like looking at it

Nick

 

[Oleg Volk]

Expendable (cheap) camera on a tripod, most likely.

 

[winstonsmith]

THIS ONLY APPLIES

If anyone is holding the camera:

I've done some pretty stupid things, but... wow...

 

[45R]

Geeeeeeeez..................this one has me speechless. :banghead:

 

[Nick1911]

Expendable (cheap) camera on a tripod, most likely.

It was taken with a Fuji Film FinePix A210 on April 20th of this year.

Nick

 

[iamhistory]

2) Pointing at something not willing to destroy

He he........how do you know he's NOT? Could be someone behind that camera who was just taking pics of the guys girlfriend or something.

 

[Sberk1]

Shouldn't somebody as smart as this guy be hold the pistol sideways??

 

[BluesBear]

I see nothing wrong with the photo at all.
The caption could be better though.

This is EXACTLY what every burglar should expect to see EVERY time they break into someones home.

When someone invades your home you don't have time to toss on eyes & ears.
And if I confront a badguy in my home, my finger WILL be on the trigger and there will be a hollow point (or a Glaser) in the chamber.


As to the pointing of a loaded gun at a camera. That's just one of the reasons they invented tripods, timers and cable releases as well as mirrors.

 

[ScottS]

From a technical point of view, I'm impressed. I could never get the lighting and focus on my Digicam just right to see the actual JHP.

Beyond the technical details, there aren't enough facts know to make a judgement.

Scott

 

[cracked butt]

Not 100% sure if he's sitting or standing and leaning way forward, but it looks like if someone were to get behind him and give him a little shove, he'd be sent sprawling.

 

[Nick1911]

From a technical point of view, I'm impressed. I could never get the lighting and focus on my Digicam just right to see the actual JHP.

I agree. This was shot at 9:15 at night, with flash, and a shutter speed of 1\60 eek: seems kind of fast...) with an apature of 3.2. I guess settings make sence - with a flash anyway.

Nick

 

[shep854]

WHEW! Even though I'm looking at an image on my computer screen, it gives me the willies!

 

[Hawkman]

Ok, I'll bite Nick1911. How do you know all the details?

 

[chevrofreak]

I've taken a pic of a JHP down the barrel of my Glock, but I first removed the striker, which isnt hard at all to do.

 

[cordex]

Properly done, nothing wrong at all.
Improperly done, dangerous.

 

[Nick1911]

Ok, I'll bite Nick1911. How do you know all the details?

Easy. I read the EXIF data.

Most modern mainstream digital camera's record information about the settings and the camera in the header of the image file. Sometimes this gets destroyed in the editing process, but this one wasn't. Various programs can read and interpret the data... I use this one . EXIF data can reveal some interesting things, once you know it exists.

Nick

 

[aguyindallas]

The debate is that this may or may not have been dangerous, depending on the set up which we can't obviously see.

One fact still remains:

The bore looks squeeky clean!

 

[sturmruger]

As long as there was no person on the other side of the camera I see nothing at all wrong with this pic. In fact it is one of the more interesting photos I have seen in a long time.

 

[laynlow]

He has a poor grip on the gun, OTT nothing.

 

[Baba Louie]

My dear old Dad taught me to aim at the COM, NOT THE HEAD (or specifically the target's left eye) since they're smaller and more prone to movement... but it's quite an effective photo, no red pupil, clear focus of all items within range, details, etc.
I agree with BluesBear on the caption, but that's just me being a nitpicker. Foul language (implied) is just soo tacky, doncha think?
It does tend to look like about a .75 caliber when looking down the bore in that fashion, don't it? Makes me wonder if it's a 9, .40 or .45...

 

[ScottS]

He has a poor grip on the gun, OTT nothing.

Really? Looks like a pretty vanilla "thumbs down" two-handed hold, although to be honest I've never looked at my hands from this angle. Isosceles guy, too, I see.

Easy. I read the EXIF data.

Most modern mainstream digital camera's record information about the settings and the camera in the header of the image file. Sometimes this gets destroyed in the editing process, but this one wasn't. Various programs can read and interpret the data... I use this one . EXIF data can reveal some interesting things, once you know it exists.

This might be the most useful little nugget in this thread. Thanks!

Scott