Very scarey photo

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:02 pm

Here is a 100% crop of the eye of the Brazilian Lancehead snake from yesterday.

I find it interesting that there are scuff marks visible on his eye. Snakes have a clear scale covering their eye, rather than an eyelid (one way to tell snakes from legless lizards), and he appears to have had a scrape (literally). I doubt it interferes with his vision much, and of course as a pit viper, he isn't as handicapped as he otherwise would be. There was glass in between me and the snake, but due to the great distance between the glass and the snake, and the shallow DOF, I'm pretty sure that what we are seeing is on the snake, not the glass. The eye scale is shed along with the rest of his skin, so in a few months, he will have a new, scuffless scale covering his eye.

Sorry for the framing, but to keep this at 100% and within posting guidelines, I did the best I could!

salden · Post by **salden** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:50 pm

Interesting image Mike, espcially the scuff marks. It does look like it could be on the glass.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:14 pm

Well, I er...uh...um...bet it's...uh

on the snake.

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:00 am

Interesting couple of posts Mike. Looking closely you can see that the scuff marks cover the iris as well as the pupil - would be interesting to see a slow motion video of it dilating and contracting.

I'm determined to make use of that "clear and shedding eye scale" info - I'll just wait for over-dinner discussion to get round to snakes and then....

Bruce

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:32 am

Awesome.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:12 am

due to the great distance between the glass and the snake, and the shallow DOF, I'm pretty sure that what we are seeing is on the snake, not the glass.

I'm inclined to think it's a scuffed eyeball too, but shallow DOF gives only weak evidence here. That's because the snake's eye is strongly convex. Any reflections from its surface will appear to be only slightly behind it. Doesn't matter if the actual glass is five feet away, the reflection of the glass will be only a fraction of an inch behind the eye, conceivably within DOF even at this magnification.

You could tell for sure, if you have a chance to shoot the same snake with its head in a different orientation. If the lines move with the head, they're on the eye; if they stay aligned with the window, they're on the window. For that matter, if you know for sure that the camera was horizontal for this shot, then the fact that the lines are slanted argues pretty strongly that they're on the eye. Otherwise they'd have to be slanted on the window -- not likely considering how window washers work.

--Rik

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:15 am

rjlittlefield wrote:
For that matter, if you know for sure that the camera was horizontal for this shot, then the fact that the lines are slanted argues pretty strongly that they're on the eye. Otherwise they'd have to be slanted on the window -- not likely considering how window washers work.

Rik's point is a good one. The camera was level or close to level, with the snake's head at a moderate angle as you see in these two shots. If these were window-washing scratches, the snake's head would have to be pointed almost straight up or straight down, which wasn't the case.