Poll: Estimation - How good is your eye? *Update* with more pics

[Kyteland]

Take a look at this pic and vote on how high you think it is.

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/kyteland/DSC_0375.jpg [562 KB]

Edit: Answer is below. Vote before you look

Edit 2:
Someone asked for more pics. DSC_0374.jpg is of the same thing but from the top. The rest are just pics of the area.

I took these in the Badlands of South Dakota on Saturday with my D70.

DSC_0360.jpg
DSC_0363.jpg
DSC_0369.jpg
DSC_0374.jpg
DSC_0375.jpg
DSC_0378.jpg

 

[LordJezo]

I put 1ft because my guess is that this is a trick question and thats actually a macro shot of a pothole or something.

 

[theNEOone]

with no point of reference, my best guess is 19"


=|

 

[rh71]

I always use a standard human as the standard of height. I guestimated how many humans stacked on top of each other would get that high (6ft each)... I said 500 feet. Of course it's not very relational from this vantage point.

 

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: rh71
I always use a standard human as the standard of height. I guestimated how many humans stacked on top of each other would get that high (6ft each)... I said 500 feet. Of course it's not very relational from this vantage point.

i would seriously like to know how you "guestimate" the size of a 6ft person in relation to that image.


=|

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

500' or so...

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: theNEOone

Originally posted by: rh71
I always use a standard human as the standard of height. I guestimated how many humans stacked on top of each other would get that high (6ft each)... I said 500 feet. Of course it's not very relational from this vantage point.

i would seriously like to know how you "guestimate" the size of a 6ft person in relation to that image.


=|

I have no relative point... was just a guess. I put a human at the base of that pic and guessed about 26 humans upward. Since there is also depth & angle to consider, it should be even higher. It was a toss-up between 2 of the poll choices... 500ft or 1000ft+. I didn't think it was the latter.

 

[calvinbiss]

when do we get to find out

 

[Kyteland]

Hopefully people will vote before they read this, but it is about 5 ft tall. My roommate was shocked when I told him this. If you look closely at the top you can see little bits of grass growing.

That picture was taken in the Badlands of South Dakota.

 

[rh71]

Damn you... I was thinking Mount Rushmore. Whoever took that should be a special effects coordinator in movies. You know how they make model airplanes and trains look real...

 

[LostHiWay]

I'm pretty sure I can see trees up top so I'm putting 1000+, however I could be totally wrong and those trees could be grass or weeds

 

[Fiveohhh]

My brother just brought back some pics from canyonlands and they were like that you couldn't tell if they were 5 ft or 1000ft

 

[Kyteland]

Originally posted by: rh71
Damn you... I was thinking Mount Rushmore. Whoever took that should be a special effects coordinator in movies. You know how they make model airplanes and trains look real...

I took that this weekend. I didn't think twice about it, lots of things look like that in the Badlands, but my roomate was shocked when I said it was only 5ft high. He didn't believe me until I showed him the grass.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

probably 1.5 to 2 feet.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I guessed 10' based on the grass. Tough to tell, though, and I will be interested in the results.

 

[VictorLazlo]

The bottom half of the image looks like mud only a few feet across, but the top half looks like a massive cliff because of all the detail in the layers.

 

[richardycc]

I think I can see the shadow of the person taking the picture in the middle the picture, so about 10ft?

 

[calvinbiss]

Originally posted by: Kyteland
Hopefully people will vote before they read this, but it is about 5 ft tall. My roommate was shocked when I told him this. If you look closely at the top you can see little bits of grass growing.

That picture was taken in the Badlands of South Dakota.

Its impossible to tell thats grass. That picture could easliy have been taken in West Texas, cuase thats exactly what the scrub brush looks like on top of the hills.

Its amazing how important reference is.

 

[ATLien247]

Originally posted by: calvinbiss

Originally posted by: Kyteland
Hopefully people will vote before they read this, but it is about 5 ft tall. My roommate was shocked when I told him this. If you look closely at the top you can see little bits of grass growing.

That picture was taken in the Badlands of South Dakota.

Its impossible to tell thats grass. That picture could easliy have been taken in West Texas, cuase thats exactly what the scrub brush looks like on top of the hills.

Its amazing how important reference is.

I estimated 100' because I, too, thought the grass on top was scrub brush...

 

[Lola]

ohh...so close. i said 10ft

 

[GTaudiophile]

NM

 

[LordJezo]

Originally posted by: Kyteland
Hopefully people will vote before they read this, but it is about 5 ft tall. My roommate was shocked when I told him this. If you look closely at the top you can see little bits of grass growing.

That picture was taken in the Badlands of South Dakota.

I win.

 

[SWScorch]

I said 1 foot, because I could see grass at the top and the sand grains looked big enough to be a close up shot or something. I want more pics!!!

 

[notfred]

This has nothing to do with your eye's ability to estimate height. I guarantee you that if you put anyone who posted in this thread in front of that, in person, they would have estimated the right height.

And I guessed 1 foot. The clumps of sand are way to big to be a giant wall. If it was 500 feet tall, each grain of sand would be about a foot in diameter.

 

[Jgtdragon]

I thought it was 100ft. DUH!