Previous photo Fort de la Chartreuse | Urbexation 2006 Next photo
Opening of Heaven

Opening of Heaven

Bookmark and Share More info
comments

Please remember that the comments posted here are not the opinions of opacity.us or its affiliates.

*gasp* So true!
Absolutely stunning!!
Look at that sky! Awesome!
very enchanting.........
wallpaper please
These manipulated photos look surreal and whimsical but I often wonder what they look like "untouched". Maybe you could do a "before and after" like you do the "then and now" shots.
I know I've commented on a ton of these, but dammit man, this gallery is incredible! Some of your best work thus far.... (maybe it was the beer?! lol)
This is what infrared photos look like right out of the camera - http://www.opacity.us/...heaven_untouched.jpg
And yet another wallpaper... : )
Wow Motts, the title suits perfectly.

And thank you for the link, it's interesting to see what it looks like!
Yeah, thanks for the alternate view. Both of my cameras have "effects settings" but the only changes I've bothered with is from color to black and white. What I meant regarding this photo was what it looked like without any effects.
There seems to be an angel spreading its wings over the joining of the two sections of building.
This are the pictures I love your site for...
Stunning.
I love also how the tents give you a prespective on the scale of the building.
Just perfect! Great job, Motts
Looks like stuff that I found growing on a block of cheese in my fridge ;)
stunning...
Wow....... LOVE it!!!!!! <3
J-131274: What Motts means here is that the photo was shot using infrared film and an infrared filter on the lens. I don't know if you could call that an "effect," because the camera is only capturing wavelengths the human eye can't perceive, which the film then translates into shades of gray that we can see. On the other hand, "effects" that modern digital cameras do take the visible light captured by the camera and process that data to create the desired effect.

I think what you're asking for is a shot on black and white or color film for comparison, which would have required changing film types, removing the filter, and then setting the camera back up to take the exact same shot. Unless Motts did that, there's no picture existing with "no effects" as in "what the human eye would see".

I hope that makes sense!
Wallpaper... please
@ greg: except he only uses digital cameras (as posted on his about page) so it's most likely just an infrared filter. is that correct, motts? if that's the case, he could simply remove the filter and re-take the shot. :) thanks for including the "pre" picture...i've been looking into getting an infrared filter and wondered what post-processing would need to be.
its so surreal!! i love it!
named it perfect, so beautiful
nice shot
Bizaar
JUST WOW:)
thought it was a b&w thanks for the lesson
Stunning!

Comments pertaining to real location names, methods of entering the property, promotions or advertisements, off-topic discussion and general flaming, as well as those submitted under various aliases are subject to immediate deletion and your ip address being banned from this website. By submitting your comment you agree to these terms. Visit the forum for off-topic and general discussion. To prevent your comment from being removed and to help keep this site uncluttered, please read more about comments on opacity.

Memories and stories from past employees, visitors or patients are gratefully welcomed, they help keep these places alive!

Please answer this security question to help our efforts to fight automated advertising and SPAM. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Question: What does not belong: apple, tripod, camera, lens
 
Previous photo Fort de la Chartreuse | Urbexation 2006 Next photo