Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Is This Picture Taken?  
User currently offlineFJWH From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 969 posts, RR: 3
Posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8906 times:

Hi all,

The "Top of Yesterday" picture:

View Large View Medium

Photo © Thierry Deutsch


How do you think this picture is taken?
I think that the Cessna is on hold and the 747 is on final and almost about to touch down. But I'm not sure.

Thanks for replies.


Greetings from France, Le Barcares, Cap Coudalere!
FJWH

[Edited 2004-07-15 01:55:53]


FlightS in the next 3 months: MSP, PHX, MEM, NCE, TFS, BCN. All round trips from AMS
45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSV747-468 From Saudi Arabia, joined Apr 2000, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8839 times:

I agree with ya, I think thats the way the picture was taken!

User currently offlineHenpol747 From Mexico, joined Jun 2001, 588 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 8787 times:


I believe too, that´s the way it was taken. Very impressive pic btw!!

Henpol747

Greetings from France, Haute Savoie, Annecy!



Vive la France! ¡Viva México!
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 8636 times:

My vote is that they used a camera. However, I'm no expert.


Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineA330Fan1 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 856 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 8524 times:

Isn't that...a kinda low, and dangerous approach for the 747? I'm sure the Cessna pilots had some preoccupations regarding the proximity of the 747 to them!

-A330Fan1


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8309 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 8479 times:

I don't see why this is questionable? The C172 is holding, the 747 is landing on the active. Cut and dry. Although the 747 does seem a bit low, it may just be an illusion... or maybe he was just low.. that happens too.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 8436 times:

Way to be an #@# InnocuousFox.

One would think that with the amount of power a 747 puts out that a simple 172 would be nothing at all to stop it. A bit of wake turbulence on the taxi way??

Great pic too!

UA777222



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineMikester540 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 158 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8384 times:

That 172 must've been shaken about after that thing got past it...
Awesome pic!



Mike



We need men who can dream of things that never were. -John F. Kennedy
User currently offlineMd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8347 times:

Photoshop anyone?

Where the 747's shadow? Look at the shadow from the pitot tubes....now look at the ground...where is it? You should be able to see the tail shadow at least.

It actually appears like the 747 is closer but that is not possible.

My guess is this is standard film and carefully double exposed. The first shot of the holding cessna....and the cameraman purposefully "followed an imaginary heavy" to give the primary exposure that motion blur look. Then the second exposure could be taken of the landing 747 with a seriously high shutter speed (notice how sharp the 747 is).


User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8323 times:

Hmmm...the CESSNA has a shadow...interesting!

Chuck


User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 19
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8293 times:

The ground is not flat, means, that the runway is actually behind a "hill". Thus no asphalt and no shadows visible.
The Cessna holds in enough distance, but they must gotten some minor shaking.
If you watch the trees carefully you see, they are upright, but the ground, including the taxiway is not flat. Maybe you try to find a map of ELLX and you should see elevations and uneven ground there.
Also, this thread belongs to Photography, not General Aviation.
Dave, good one. Really think it was a camera? I vote for a stone with slaves carving the shades into it and coloring that later... Poor scanner the stone was put onto...lol


Edited to change abbreviation into full word to avoid nice pop up info...



[Edited 2004-07-15 07:04:16]


Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8264 times:

Md80fanatic, you are openly accusing a photographer of faking an image, and that is very bad form. Btw, the shadows line up as they should, so you are also wrong. Look at the shadows on the engines of the 744 from the wings. Now compare that angle with the shadow on the horizontal stabilizer of the cessna cast by the cessna's tail fin.

The pic is legit.

And InnocuousFox, yes it was most likely a camera used to capture the image Big grin


User currently offlineFlykal From Australia, joined Sep 2003, 442 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 8089 times:

How about the 744 is landing in front of the Cessna. The Cessna has already passed the active and you simply cannot see the active runway because the 744 is closer than the Cessna.


One doesn't discover new lands without consenting to lose sight of the shore for a very long time
User currently offlineTobetruie From France, joined Jun 2004, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7724 times:

I totally agree with Flykal !

The 747 is at the front, facing the runway you can't see, with its shadow on it. The Cessna got passed and is at the background. NOT the invert.

It's "easy" to see when you know how work a digital autofocus camera. The aim and the focus is making on one of the element of the picture, here the 747 which appears to be sharpen. The background is therefore a little bit blury.

No Photoshop here... This pic rules !  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



Te amo Ana, hasta siempre
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6806 times:

InnocuousFox is just trying to compensate for his apparently very small wee-wee, so no worries there guys.

My guess is that the Cessna is preparing for an intersection takeoff somewhere near the thousand-footers. As you can see, the taxiway continues past the point where the 747 is landing, which hints that the runway edge is in fact NOT in the picture. I looked at it googly-eyed myself.

There's a good possibility that, in the interest of safety, ATC directed him to this point for wake turbulence avoidance. If the Cessna rotated before the point that the 747 touched down, there's a very high chance that the Cessna could hit some bad wake turbulence, with messy results.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6703 times:

I say that it is real.

My best explanation is that the Cessna is actually farther away than it seems. In the picture, it looks like the 747's nose is going to pass right over it, but in reality, only the outer wing will pass over it.

On another note, why would a photographer with about four-hundred pictures in the database risk everything with one fake shot?  Nuts

-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6013 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6222 times:

Jesus, you guys are making it much more complicated than it is - the Cessna is most likely holding at an intersection before to the end of the runway, since it's in no need of an entire runway. That would place the 744F at the correct spot as well as the CEssna.

User currently offlineMd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5991 times:

I did nothing of the sort. I would never accuse someone I do not know of anything non-legitimate. Besides I didn't know that only single exposure shots without any editing are allowed on here? I am no photog so my comment was a educated guess at best.

Please don't put words into my mouth. Thank you.

WTH anyway???????  Insane


User currently offlineMd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5926 times:

Risk Everything? What is this a contest? Crap I thought this was just a place where people could share their aviation pictures.



User currently offlineMd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5854 times:

The 747 HAS to be further away. Place (in your mind) the pilot figure in the 747 into the cessna.....he would barely be able to see over the instrument panel. If you (mentally) place the cessna pilot into the 747 his stature would fill the entire cockpit leaving no room for the FO. So then the 747 is necessarily further away.

The thread starter asked the question "How was this shot taken".....and if nothing but the press of the shutter button is allowed to make images for A.net....then the answer posted above of a "camera" being used is really the best and closet answer that can be garnered here.


User currently offlineFJWH From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 969 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5714 times:

Md80fanatic:

You know exactly what I mean by "How was this shot taken".

But flykal and Tobetruie, I think your right. It looks like the 747 is at the front and not the Cessna. Under the 747 is the runway which you don't see at the picture and the Cessna is just taxing at a taxiway I guess.

FJWH



FlightS in the next 3 months: MSP, PHX, MEM, NCE, TFS, BCN. All round trips from AMS
User currently offlineMd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5704 times:

Okay, after looking at the pic again for a good long time. Here's what's up.

The 747 is about 300+ feet beyond the cessna. You can see the beginning of the runway threshold directly behind the cessna's cockpit....extending to the left edge of the photo. Since the 747 is so much further away than what it looks....and the taxiway looks to be rising up towards the runway in the distance...the shadow must be over the "horizon" (the topline) of the field beyond the cessna.





User currently offlineCaetravlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 909 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5630 times:

I am no expert, but you can definitely tell that the Cessna is on a taxiway that is perpendicular to the landing path of the 747 based on the direction of the lines it is following. I agree that it must be holding, and waiting for the 747 to land on the active, or at least taxiing toward the active after having just turned onto its current taxiway. I am sure the runway is just over that hill. I would love to get any more comments from the person who actually took the picture. It is an amazing optical illusion. I used to try and get shots with the same type of optical illusion when spotting on the parallel taxiways at SFO. I just didn't have the lenses to get the shots I wanted from the distance I was at.


A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
User currently offlineFJWH From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 969 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5606 times:

Yeah, other option indeed: Mail the photographer  Smile

I'll let you know

FJWH



FlightS in the next 3 months: MSP, PHX, MEM, NCE, TFS, BCN. All round trips from AMS
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 32
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5569 times:

Come on guys, it's just the distance compression you get with a zoom lens. I'll bet the two aircraft are pretty far apart.

SKillfull composition. Not easy to do.



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
25 Post contains images Md80fanatic : FJWH, I cannot read your post...only the title. For some reason I can never read the first post to a thread. If you clarified yourself I am not able t
26 Continental : FlyKal nailed it. The 747 is closer to the photographer than the Cessna. All you need to do is compare the sizes.
27 FJWH : Md80fanatic: I want to help you, but I don't know which post exactly your talking about. A respones from me or someone else or..?? FJWH
28 Post contains images FJWH : I've send a mail to the photographer and he mailed back: "Hi Frederik, I've just read the thread and I'm quite astonished of what people interpret in
29 Md80fanatic : Your introductory post I cannot read.....some kinda issue related to me I suppose. I cannot read the first post of ANY topic...not just yours. Sorry.
30 Patroni : The shot is taken at the right moment and from a good location. Due to the zoom compression the Cessna and 744 look closer than they actually are. Bei
31 Md80fanatic : The 747 is further away than the cessna is what he is trying to say. The runway is further away from and above the cessna. It's the pre-concieved noti
32 Post contains images SafetyDude : Md80fanatic, Rather than firing off a reply, think about Airliners.net. It is one of the most respectable web pages in the world, and definitely the f
33 Post contains images SafetyDude : I just got this e-mail from some person (I think a few other people also got this), and I thought that I would share it with you. -- Hi, I'm sorry tha
34 Post contains links FJWH : the link between brackets...< link > http://www.sweb.cz/c-e-n-d-a/a-net.jpg
35 Post contains images Thom@s : It is obvious that the Cessna is closer to the camera than the 747. I can't understand how anyone could question that. I must agree with CPH-R and say
36 Post contains images Md80fanatic : My apologies, I didn't realise I became a member of such an important community. Honestly....Perhaps I made a mistake joining here, I am not too big o
37 Md80fanatic : Anyway I'm sorry if I ticked anyone off. Sometimes I can be like a sumo wrestler in a china shop...... ummm bad example.....uhhh well you get the idea
38 Nudelhirsch : You mean "like a 747 in a CRJ Overhead Bin... lol Let's stay on topic and chose our phrases like that... Hey, it's just the over-moron kidding again..
39 Post contains images Wannabe : The 747 is flying over the grassy knoll. Come on guys, give it a break!! C172 holding short to taxi across active runway as 747 lands. Shot with a 300
40 Post contains links and images Flykal : This topic has probably got all the mileage it deserves...but the temptation to post again has won over... I was also a lucky recipient of that email
41 Continental : "Cessna 172 IS NOT beyond B747F, all you need to do is compare the sizes... ..just how user Continental writes (despite he's wrong with his statement
42 Md80fanatic : Those people are WAY in front of that plane. Using simple perspective....and knowing the size of a human body vs. a 777 makes the determination easy.
43 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : Flykal, Nice try, but no cigar. Outside of your poor understanding of telefoto lenses, you are missing one glaringly large fact: 747's do not land on
44 Jderden777 : as many have said on here it is clearly evident that the 172 is holding short of the runway while the 747 is landing behind...i'm sure the photographe
45 Post contains images Flykal : Flykal, Nice try, but no cigar. Outside of your poor understanding of telefoto lenses, you are missing one glaringly large fact: I agree with your ini
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...
How Was This Picture Taken? posted Sun Apr 17 2005 22:39:26 by RootsAir
How Was This Picture Taken posted Tue Jul 29 2003 07:31:40 by Paulinbna
How Can This Picture Taken? posted Thu Nov 2 2000 00:49:10 by Endofdays
How Is This A Bad Picture? posted Fri Apr 23 2004 14:22:44 by Cancidas
How Is This Photo Being Taken? posted Wed Apr 3 2002 07:51:30 by QANTAS747-438
How Is This Bad Motive? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 01:16:26 by Phxplanes
How Is This Rare Shot? posted Mon Mar 20 2006 03:11:23 by Silver1SWA
How Does This Picture Work? posted Mon Sep 5 2005 13:58:53 by Corey07850
How Is This Badmotiv? posted Tue Apr 19 2005 23:26:03 by EZYAirbus
How Is This Bad Quality posted Tue Sep 28 2004 22:22:30 by Delta767-400
How Is This Photo Being Taken? posted Wed Apr 3 2002 07:51:30 by QANTAS747-438
Is This Picture In The DB? (Local Newspaper!) posted Sun Apr 19 2009 17:53:46 by NicolasRubio
Is This Picture Of Panda Flying A Fake? posted Mon Dec 15 2008 00:48:35 by SANFinn
Is This Picture Really Soft? posted Thu Sep 6 2007 23:17:54 by Carlos
How Is This Motive? posted Wed Jun 20 2007 22:49:59 by Acontador
Is This Picture Any Good For Airliners.net posted Mon Mar 19 2007 21:40:38 by Aviator1990