Re:It's old news... (Score 1)

I took the 'phenomenon' image, and, using Paint Shop Pro, subtracted the 'afer' image, then looked at the negative of the resulting image. (I did the same with the 'before' image, but the results of this manipulation are better with the 'after' image. I could see the streak and the flash (and, I think, water reflections around the flash) quite clearly. First, the only things that 'changed' in the time between the frames was the streak and flash, the position of the top of large cloud, and general wave reflections. It's not clear what the duration was between photos. (Somebody said somewhere in this discussion that the duration was brief because the position of 'the speed boat' doesn't change much. There is no speed boat: the 'boats' appear to me to be anchored tugs and barges.) Second, in addition the 'flash' itself, there also appears to be a line of reflections of the flash from wavelets in the body of water. (This is not 'smoke' or 'splash' or 'lightning' -- it appears to be reflections) The line of reflections of the arc extends from the far shore to the pier/bridge. Close to the flash, the flash reflections form a semi-circle around the flash. The line of flash reflections can be seen less clearly in the origial photo. My theory: The image phenomenon was caused by a split-second arc in the lamp. The flash reflected from wavelets across the width of the water body. I wonder if the 'dark streak' could possibly be a shadow cast by some small structural lamp support, conceivably something within the bulb? Filaments in bulbs do arc and fail, and the resulting flash is very bright and very brief -- more-or-less a strobe. And the bulb survives the arc event. But I have no idea if the lamps on this dock had filaments.