# Is it real or photoshopped?



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

I'm guessing it's photoshopped, or otherwise not real. Why? because looking at the cut… it would take a 30 foot chainsaw to make that cut. Also the large splinter hanging on the side, by the cable. Seems a splinter that big would have fallen off. But I could be wrong. What say you?


----------



## RonInOhio (Jul 23, 2010)

I would also say that the log is a teensy-weensy bit too big for that truck.


----------



## a1Jim (Aug 9, 2008)

Photo shoped


----------



## cutworm (Oct 2, 2010)

I want to see the saw they used to cut it into. Mother of all saws.


----------



## Grandpa (Jan 28, 2011)

I don't see any other trees like this in the forrest behind the log. There are trees that large but there is not just one tree in a forest of smaller trees. It would be nice to see a closer view of the growth rings to see if they were 2 feet wide. I cut a 37 inch diasmeter oak tree. The log I wanted to move was about 10 feet long. It was estimated (with a chart for this type of thing) to be about 5,000 pounds. This log would weigh a hundred tons.


----------



## Bob Collins (Apr 25, 2008)

Depending where the photo was taken Ted. If in the USA I would say it was photoshopped but it could possibly be one of our Australian Red Gums so it would be a real fair dinkum photo. By the way this would be one of
the SMALLER Murray Red Gum trunks maybe 4-500 years old. Makes damn good fire wood.


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

Optical illusion.

The log is in the foreground. The truck is in the distance.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

Woodcraft shared it on their facebook page.. assuming it really is Woodcrafts facebook page 

http://www.facebook.com/WoodcraftWoodworking

So I just thought I'd post it here and get some of you guys's opinions.

I was thinking maybe Paul Bunyan and his little brother with a 2-man hand saw?


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Maybe not photo-shopped. Ever hear of Forced perspective. The log is real close to the camera, note the crane BESIDE it. That truck is a long way off. I'll bet the logs on that truck are the same size as the one hanging there.


----------



## BuckNasty (Nov 21, 2012)

no shadow?


----------



## bernwood (Aug 19, 2010)

Some of the trees in the back ground are growing under the log and on the front side and that tree on top in the background sooooo much taller then its' neighbors.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

Loren, I was also thinking that.. but it looks like the top of the racks on the truck are in front of the very bottom of the log.

Bob, we have a few trees this size and larger, such as Sequoia Redwood. But like Grandpa pointed out, the trees in the background don't appear anywhere near the same size.

Anyway, I just posted it here for kicks. I'm sure there's enough wood in that log to build a nice end table.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

Tyler, good point. The truck has a shadow under it, as does the crane.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

I gotta agree with you, Bandit. I was thinking not force perspective because the top of the truck racks seem to be in front of the log. But then I looked closer and I think they are behind the log. I think it's not photoshopped but force perspective, as you say.


----------



## RiverWood (Nov 4, 2010)

now everyone will know the secret of my big fish pictures


----------



## vonhagen (Dec 5, 2011)

what gives it away is the cable size and also the control panel size also no shadow under the log so the pic is of the log up close. looks like a double exposure.


----------



## MonteCristo (May 29, 2012)

Might look real after maybe a dozen beer . . .


----------



## jdubrow (Jan 17, 2013)

I don't think it is photoshopped. I think they just got a perspective in which it just looks huge.


----------



## vonhagen (Dec 5, 2011)

by the size of the control box i would say the log is about 6 feet in diameter


----------



## Bogeyguy (Sep 26, 2012)

I think it's real. There are tree still growing on this planet that have a base diameter of 36" and larger. Sequoias and Cedars.


----------



## bandit571 (Jan 20, 2011)

Shadow for the log is outside the bottom of the picture. Also, check out the "size" of those vines on the log. Now, figure what is the largest vine size. Log itself is maybe ten feet long? Fellow in the background is about half way between the log and the truck. I reckon the truck is at least 80' away?

In another lifetime, I worked as a Foward Observer. Eyeballs were trained to pick things out, and guesstimate ranges. Nowadays it is done with lasers. Ever go deer hunting with an 8" Howitzer? And place a shell right under it's rear end @ 1700 meters away? I think we found a hind leg, up in a tree, later.


----------



## vonhagen (Dec 5, 2011)

i agree with jdubrow


----------



## carver (Nov 4, 2010)

I logged this kind of wood for many years in Oregon and Alaska and I guarantee thats not photo shopped. It is an old growth cedar that is being loaded with the yarder. A yarder is the equipment used to drag the logs out of the woods.The piece of equipment used to load the logs couldn't get their grapples around it so they strapped it and lifted it in the air for the truck to back under. The reason there are smaller logs on the truck is to make a bed for this log to sit on…...also note the hole in the middle.Thats the only part of this tree that rots away…..Now note the average size of a second growth cedar being logged is about the size of that hole…...the message …..when you buy rot resistant cedar…....it's not…....same with second growth redwood …..alo I would guess ths"swell butt" to be about 6ft on the small end and 9ft on the swell end…..Not very desirable wood on the market because of the swell creating curl in th wood.


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

I think it's a typical log. Everything else, including the person, is miniature.


----------



## derosa (Aug 21, 2010)

Wouldn't matter, with that hole in the middle you just can't get one good wide board. Maybe good for a few toothpicks at best.


----------



## AKSteve (Feb 4, 2012)

that is definitely Old growth but there is no way it's that big. that log would crush that little truck, I lived in Washington and fished Oregon and I have seen some old growth stumps that would blow your mind at the size of them but nothing that big. I have never been to Southern Alaska so I can't say how big the trees get down around Juneau, but there are no trees up here that big, it's too cold for that kind of growth up here. Awesome picture though! thanks for sharing.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

Steve, I get what you're saying.. it's not as big as the perspective makes it appear, but it is big. Maybe 4' to 5' diameter at the end we're looking at. The far end looks to be a bit wider. But the way they took the photo, it appears to be three times it's actual size.

So, you don't think they could get any decent quartersawn wood from that log? It looks like they could get something our of it, at least to my untrained eye.


----------



## runswithscissors (Nov 8, 2012)

Oh, it's real alright. That's an old growth red cedar. We have trees like that all over here in the Pac N.W. Forced perspective? I think not. Notice that the truck and the log are in focus. If the log was close and truck far away, one or the other would be out of focus. Anyhow, I can't believe anyone would try to fool us like that.


----------



## Roger Clark aka Rex (Dec 30, 2008)

Gives a new dimension to the saying; "Put another Log on the Fire"


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Small aperture, long depth of field. Log in the foreground, truck in the background. Log 6 - 8 feet in diameter judging by the relationship to the tower. I'd guess redwood but the picture seems to be saturated with red, with a different color bias I might guess western red cedar. If it was hi-def it would be easier to identify.

Not common to see a log that size anymore but not unheard of. There are a lot of them still standing here on the Olympic Peninsula but not many of them get cut anymore. In the sixties and early seventies it was not unusual to see a one log load on the road. It's a photo-op these days.


----------



## tomd (Jan 29, 2008)

Where I come from we called that brush, we used to push them out of the way so we could get to the big ones.


----------



## runswithscissors (Nov 8, 2012)

Way down on the "interesting trees" thread there is one that looks about this big. I doubt if it's photoshopped, as it looks as if it was taken in the 1880s or so. Shows about 50 loggers sitting on, standing on, and leaning against it.


----------



## AKSteve (Feb 4, 2012)

oh I would definitely love to get my hands on some of that old growth for sure Ted. It would take forever to figure just exactly what to build with it. but I know I would keep most of it for myself HA. you could furnish your whole house with that.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Photoshopped. You can see where it was cut out.


----------



## nomercadies (Dec 31, 2011)

If the log is real, whatever ate the hind end out of it needs to be respected.


----------



## helluvawreck (Jul 21, 2010)

Get a load of this video.


----------



## elkhunter (Mar 28, 2007)

Ive seen a single log, log truck load a couple of yeas back. I would agree this is a force perspective and would bet it was just unloaded. We have several large red cedar trees it my area (north Idaho) The largest is 18 foot at the butt at chest hight (google "giant cedar near elk river idaho").


----------



## Martyroc (Feb 1, 2012)

Definatley Photoshoped but a very cool pic non the less


----------



## nomercadies (Dec 31, 2011)

You'd hope by now they would have manufactured a hard hat you don't have to take off when you crawl into the jaws of one of those things. Seems dangerous not to wear your safety equipment.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

The truck is not in focus, its close but not quite in focus. Photographers had many tricks long before the days of photoshop, photoshop just makes it easy now.

Notice the detail in the bark on the log in question, now look for the detail in the bark of the logs on the truck…..you can't see any because they are alot farther away.

Here is a similar picture, some US soldiers were having fun with camera perspective telling people back home these spiders were as big as dinner plates.


----------



## joeyinsouthaustin (Sep 22, 2012)

maybe they used a really small truck to make the log look big?


----------



## Scsmith42 (Jan 26, 2011)

It's real; I look at logs this size all the time. It's probably in the 5' - 6' diameter range judging by the size of the cable versus the size of the log.

The comments about optical illusion and forced perspective explain why. It is definitely larger than the logs on the truck though.


----------



## carver (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm tellin you guys again …...This absolutely is not photoshop. This is not an unusual sight in the world I've lived my life in.Your making too much into the illusion thing. The reason the other logs are smaller is because a forest is not made of trees all the same size. Most logging units are on the side of a mountain. The farther you get to the bottom ,the wetter it is and the more nutrients there are to feed these huge trees. So, you have a lot of trees growing on the mountain that are average size and a limited amount of large timber growing in the bottom.when these logs get to the landing they are sorted by size and quality.The smaller logs you see are sorted farther from the yarder because they are easier to move. I guarantee,right behind where this picture is taken there is a deck of these hogs. which can,t be moved any way but rolling.I,ll say again…about 6ft plus on the small end maybe up to 9ft on the swell butt.Also after this cut, this tree would have lost size quickly.


----------



## superdav721 (Aug 16, 2010)

Thats a lot of toothpicks.


----------



## AngieO (Jul 9, 2012)

I agree with Grandpa. That was my first thought. Of course there are trees that big. And of course they can cut them down… but this shot is not real. The other trees are too small. It's just out of place in that photo.


----------



## nomercadies (Dec 31, 2011)

First of all, our time must not be as valuable as i would like people to think.

I am making some assumptions. Please let me know if I am making some improper assumptions from the picture.
Assumption #1. The log is off the ground. It appears that there are some limbs or twigs around the truck that are sticking up in front of the log so that would place the log on the side away from the camera. You can see open space under the log.

Assumption #2. The crane in the foreground is the one lifting it. I don't see anything else near enough to it to be lifting it. The leverage from the position of the log would require a very heavy counterweight on the crane. The metal on the bed of the crane running off to the left in the picture seems too thin and frail to not be bent or broken by the leverage created by the log being in the position it is.

Assumption #3. The cable is wrapped around the log twice. I think I see a second wrap of cable around the right middle of the log.

Assumption #4. We are seeing all the cable or lifting devices connected to the log.

Assumption $5. The man in the foreground is six feet tall.

Assumption #6. The truck is almost two men high.

Assumption #7. The log is more than four trucks across. (46 to 48 feet in diameter)

Assumption #8. The log's length is around 100 feet.

Assumption #9. The truck and trailer seen in the picture is for transporting the log.

Assumption #10. The truck and trailer use three axles to support the load and the surface of as many as 12 tires.

Assumption #11. The trailer is no longer than 50 feet.

Conclusion Number 1. The crane is too light to lift the log.
Conclusion Number 2. The log could not be lifted with only one cable.
Conclusion Number 3. The log could not be balanced evenly with only one cable.
Conclusion Number 4. The log could not be lifted but only rolled if the cable was only attached to one side.
Conclusion Number 5. The log could not be balanced on the truck trailer as the unsupported overhang would lift the front of the trailer right off the tractor.
Conclusion Number 6. The edges of the log in the picture are too unnatural.
Conclusion Number 7. Logs like this do exist.
Conclusion Number 8. Equipment like this does exist.
Conclusion Number 9. Equipment like this doesn't move logs like that.

Conclusion Number 10. There are far more geeks with photo manipulating software out there then there are men and ladies that can move a log like that with equipment like we see in the picture.


----------



## nomercadies (Dec 31, 2011)

Upon further observation …
there is a portion of the truck's trailer actually behind the log meaning the trailer is on the other side of the log from the camera making the perspective all wrong for the measurements I listed above. There is a rack in the front of the trailer that sticks up behind the log. The size of the cables on the crane are similarly sized to the ones surrounding the log. Makes me think the cables on the log and cables on the crane are about the same distance from the camera. It gives me a whole different perspective.

I must go now and find a life.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

Chance, I think your first assumption was exactly right… the log is 60 feet thick and 100 feet long.

Either that or the photo was edited.

Or it's a photo perspective trick.

Okay, so now I'm back to where I started… just a typical day for me. 

Personally, I think the log is about 30 to 40 inches in diameter and 6 or 7 feet long. I realize of course there are logs as big as this one appears to be… but this isn't one of them. The photo just doesn't look right.

Steve, I get what you're saying… but I respectfully disagree in the case of this photo. Something about it.. the lighting or the angles or the shadows… this photo was edited. Somebody cropped and pasted that log into the photo.

I think Scott nailed it. It's a big log, but no where near as big as the photo portrays it to be.


----------



## 280305 (Sep 28, 2008)

I agree Ted. The edges of the Leviathan Log have that "funny look" that was so prevalent in early move special effects. And as someone mentioned above, the big log shows more detailed resolution than the rest of the photo.


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

I think it is exactly the same trick of perspective as the spiders shown in post #39.
The cable around the log does not look much different than the cables on the crane, therefore the log is right beside the crane, and probably 3 to4 ft in diameter. 
The truck is way far off in the distance, maybe 100 ft past the log.


----------



## rbtpartsman (Jan 21, 2013)

I say it's fake. I do a lot of photography and you could take a picture like this and make it look larger than it is, then add it here. The log in that pic may just be a normal (but large) log that was photographed in a way to make it look huge. Just this summer I showed my cousin how to pose with a fish he caught and I took his picture. It looks like he has caught a 10# perch when in reality it was less than 4 inches.


----------

