I was curious if there were any real iceberg pictures. I think I found a few:<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthpicturegalleries/8893850/The-ethereal-beauty-of-melting-icebergs-captured-by-photographer-Paul-Souders.html?image=2" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthpicturegalleries/...</a><p><a href="http://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/underwater-iceberg-photography" rel="nofollow">http://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special...</a>
> We’re still making sales. It’s approaching $1 million. I get about 40 percent of that. It put my kids through college.<p>Wow. Can a stock image still achieve that kind of earnings in today's commodified market?
Here's a video with the photographer about the image:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NeyTEO_JP0" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NeyTEO_JP0</a>
Now the interesting thing to do would be to take one of these iceberg pictures for real. Since we can't see through this much see water the thing to do is make a huge grid of cameras and put it directly up against the iceberg.<p>Alternatively, once could lower a line of cameras to scan the iceberg.
icebergs turn over quite often, as the seawater eats away at the bottom until they become top-heavy. When they do you get that really strange brilliant blue color which comes from dense glacial ice which has had all the air bubbles forced out.
"Fake" is a little strong. As he says at the end of the article, you couldn't capture an image like that with a single photograph. He strove for accuracy, but who knows how close he got - the article doesn't go into that. His clients thought it was realistic enough and evocative enough to give him $1m.