Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Interesting Shot...  
User currently offlineKLGAviation From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 243 posts, RR: 3
Posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2932 times:

Guys,

Something about this "shot" is quite alarming. Who can tell me what it is?  Nuts


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andreas Beuermann



Your comments?

Chris


There is a fine line between a picture and a photo. The latter seems to be disappearing.
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineChrisZRH From Switzerland, joined May 2004, 423 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2861 times:

if they keep on going like this they'll crash a few seconds later! this pilots on for a heavy turn!


Christian Galliker - AirTeamImages
User currently offlineJan Mogren From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2859 times:

OMG...

I'm not at liberty to say what I think...
/JM



AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2856 times:

Could it be that it appears the aircraft in which the photographer is sitting appears to be turning straight into the other aircraft?

User currently offlineTWAMD-80 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1006 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2857 times:

It may be the fact that the airplane that the photographer is in is banking towards the other plane  Nuts

Tim



Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2841 times:

weird that on the cockpit, the shadow on the left side- the other airplane's tail seems to be in front of the shadow which would place the tail inside the other airplane's cockpit. Maybe i'm just getting old.

JP


User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2821 times:

Looks like a flight sim shot to me!

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
User currently offlineMriya From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2813 times:

Chris

Yeah looks like it to me too.. something about certain elements in that pic just doesn't sit quite right to me. Or it looks like a background editing job, as if the planes were pasted onto that backdrop.

Could be that the pic's just old or I'm seeing things. I'm not accusing, just dropping in my observations.



Currently not active in aviation photography or this site. Thank you for your interest.
User currently offlineRG828 From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 582 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2772 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The cockpit looks strange - the instruments are not in detail, regardless of the fact that its an external shot. There are other things too, but I'm not the one to judge anything here.


I dont know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2770 times:

If its a flight sim all i will say its that one hell of a flight sim !!!!

The clouds look odd aswell. If you ask me the plane also looks like its been added to the photo.. (the tail and fins look very strange to me) Then again what do i know i new to all this  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Be it real or otherwise its still a great photo !!!



Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9604 posts, RR: 69
Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2761 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

looks like one of those photo backdrops used as a prop

User currently offlineSuperHornet From United States of America, joined May 2004, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2740 times:

Okay I am going to give it a try but then I have to go hopefully someone will let me know if I am correct.

The sky has much more noise in it than the ground or aircraft features so I am going to guess that at least the sky is fake...also at least one of the plateus has been added.

someone let me know if I was right



Watch the ball
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2705 times:

Awesome shot!

User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

Strange, I did a reg# inquiry on the aircraft in the picture, here's what I found:

http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm

N8346A is reserved

Type Reservation No Fee
Mode S Code 52665141
Reserved Date 09/11/2003
Renewal Date None
Purge Date 99/99/9999
Pending Number Change None
Date Change Authorized None
Reserving Party Name SAFE FLIGHT 21 PRODUCT TEAM/AND-510/ROBERT D SMITH
Street 800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW
City WASHINGTON
State DIST. OF COL.
Zip Code 20591
County DIST OF COLUMBIA
Country UNITED STATES

This plane simply doesn't exist, otherwise there would be N8346 is Assigned, whereas the number is only reserved, to a man in Washington DC. Also, if there was an a/c flying with this registration, it would say what the a/c is. If there was an a/c flying with this registration in the past, it would list that as well. None appear.

I think we have a problem


[Edited 2004-06-19 00:20:49]

User currently offlineKLGAviation From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 243 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2697 times:

Guys,

You're all right. I found everything in the photo to be strange... the noise on the aircraft does not match that of the background. The sky looks way oversaturated. The angles of the prop looks off to me, but I think I'm just looking too closely at the photo.

JP- you're right! The sun looks as if it is behind the plane yet the cockpit has light on the side closer to the photographer. Strange....

Thanks for your input so far guys!

Chris



There is a fine line between a picture and a photo. The latter seems to be disappearing.
User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 833 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2676 times:

DLKAPA,

I don't believe that previous uses of an "N" number must be reflected in the database. In this case, "N8346A" has been used in the past,as documented in this NTSB report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=57349&key=0

But, that aircraft does get around:
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andreas Beuermann




"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2679 times:

Gentlemen,

This photograph has been the subject of much debate in the past, both externally and by the screeners. Several photographers who I would regard as technical experts when it comes to image manipulation (which I think is being implied here, even if subtly or indirectly) have taken a very close look at this image but failed to find any conclusive proof of anything untowards in it. As it is a very old image in a.net terms (uploaded almost four years ago) I suggest we let sleeping dogs lie.

Andy


User currently offlineUnited4everDEN From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2599 times:

NM, letting the dogs lie

[Edited 2004-06-19 04:54:31]

User currently offlineCon-pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2393 times:

The airplane in the picture is NOT airborn. As in it is not flying. The picture was taken while the aircraft was on the ground.

How do I know?

Look at the landing gear struts, they are depressed. If the aircraft was in the air the struts would be fully extended.

Dogs or no dogs, sleeping or not.

[Edited 2004-06-24 22:04:03]


Remember that different is different, not better or worse, just different.
User currently offlineRareBear From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 553 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2272 times:

It also appears that the lower half of the prop is still, and the upper half has been artificially blurred. Along with the depressed gear, it looks like the plane was photographed on the ground and superimposed on the Monument Valley image.


Illegitimus non carborundum
User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6688 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2079 times:

And what's just inboard of the starboard main undercarriage strut (dark patch) and what's the white patch in the nose wheel strut.

Andy



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlineMUC_Spotter From Cayman Islands, joined Apr 2002, 156 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2066 times:

what I have noticed is that the right elevator overlaps the window reflection  Confused

User currently offlineJoge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1444 posts, RR: 40
Reply 22, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2064 times:

LOL, guys!

Don't tell me that pic is f***...  Nuts

Anyway, the pic is (claimed to be) taken in 1995 and it's added to the DB year 2000. Not many DSLRs were used those days yet.  Insane

-Joge



Bula!
User currently offlineMUC_Spotter From Cayman Islands, joined Apr 2002, 156 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2023 times:

@Joge: who said this image was taken with a DSLR?
btw, there was/is still a material called 'film' to capture your images  Big grin, even in 1995


User currently offlineFSPilot747 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 3599 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (10 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 1872 times:

"Look at the landing gear struts, they are depressed. If the aircraft was in the air the struts would be fully extended."

I'll second that. We've got that plane at our FBO. Looks just like that when it's on the ground, pulls out more when it lifts off. That, and that white patch inside the strut.

Also, look at the direction of the shadow on the handle bar on the fuselage. Doesn't match the sunlight coming into the cockpit. Oh, and the windows. The scenery from outside the windows is the same tint as the scenery outside. It should be way dimmer through those windows.

One more subtle clue. Look at the top edge of the tail. A trailing strip of "white," the same white in the nosewheel strut. And..why's he cruising with gear down anyways?

Just my observations, tho. I could be totally wrong.


FSP


25 WillL : "And..why's he cruising with gear down anyways?" i think the gear lever may be jammed. i know i always retract in my warrior.
26 JetAv8r : If you had another airplane in a 45* bank about 10 feet above you, don't you think you'd be look at it instead of out the window?
27 KLGAviation : Well, I don't want to "fuel the fire" but check out the propeller. The top is blurred, but on the bottom it seems to be standing still... Chris
28 Bigphilnyc : I'm shocked no one has mentioned the clouds. you see these Nintendo (video game) looking clouds covering the sky, yet not enough shadow on the ground
29 Bronko : If the plane that is banking was going to continue its turn, wouldn't it end up in or right behind the rudder of the other plane? I am with Phil on th
30 Vafi88 : That's the first thing that came to mind... Not only do they look 'strange', but there simply aren't enough shadows to make them seem real... plus, wh
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Interesting Shot... posted Fri Jun 18 2004 21:22:20 by KLGAviation
Interesting AN-124 Shot posted Sun Oct 16 2005 10:34:58 by Brendan03
A Rain Shot. posted Sun Dec 10 2006 17:54:26 by Alibo5NGN
Interesting Effect In The Sky posted Sat Dec 2 2006 21:06:49 by Crazyro
Help On Cockpit Shot Rejection .. posted Tue Nov 28 2006 09:07:21 by Guido
My Confidence Is Really Shot... posted Tue Nov 14 2006 06:32:55 by San747
This Tail-shot - Still Acceptable Motive? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 14:36:47 by Walter2222
Dusk Shot posted Sat Nov 4 2006 18:43:38 by Ivob
How About This Evening Shot? posted Fri Nov 3 2006 00:21:52 by San747
5-seconds Cockpit Shot (unfortunate Rejection) posted Tue Oct 31 2006 21:49:42 by Guido