Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Need Help - Is This Photo Fake?  
User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9085 times:

Before everybody jumps all over me, I believe that this photo is real, however a friend of mine believes it is photoshoped due to the lack of blur behind the exhaust.

What are some of the things that prove authenticity of this photograph (aside from having another shot from a different angle)

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...dth=1000&height=685&sok=&photo_nr=


Forever New Frontiers
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6869 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9084 times:

There is another shot now, from the other side.

User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9060 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting Stratofortress (Thread starter):
aside from having another shot from a different angle

Why? Wouldn't another shot from a different angle explain it?




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Xu Zheng
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Weimeng



 Wink




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineSunnyb From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9060 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Weimeng
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Xu Zheng



I'm pretty sure they're real.
Read the comment on the first one.


User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9014 times:

The one shot by Weiment is no doubt real. It's got the exhaust plumes and its a little higher off the ground.

The other one is in question because landing gear could have been photoshoped. Not sure that anybody would taxi that close to the shoulder though.



Forever New Frontiers
User currently offlineEspion007 From Denmark, joined Dec 2003, 1691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8974 times:

Quoting Stratofortress (Reply 4):

The other one is in question because landing gear could have been photoshoped. Not sure that anybody would taxi that close to the shoulder though.

Really? Open up Xu's photo and look for the crowd of ramp workers near the parked plane staring at the one in the foreground. That seals it for me.

Also, 80% of the time of a photoshop image, Its easy to pull up the source image(s) off google image search.

Its 100% real.



Snakes on a Plane!
User currently offlineN754PR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8924 times:

I agree... you need help  Smile

User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8876 times:

They could be looking at a plane just taxing... However the nose is too high for the landing gear just to be photoshoped out.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but just looking for as much concrete evidence as possible. After all, there really are no clearly visible exhaust plumes in the back.



Forever New Frontiers
User currently offlineLongbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 8574 times:

I don't know. I just think that's TOO low. I'd be very surprised if they got the OK to fly that low with a XX million dollar plane (not sure of the cost) just for an airshow. Seems a little too risky to be real.

User currently onlineQantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1287 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 8465 times:

Quoting Longbow (Reply 8):
I don't know. I just think that's TOO low. I'd be very surprised if they got the OK to fly that low with a XX million dollar plane (not sure of the cost) just for an airshow. Seems a little too risky to be real.

Im sorry but what is wrong with you?? I mean WTF this picture is real and thats it, no its not a fake and yes its at an airshow, I the pilots know what they are doing... or they wouldnt be flying that as you stated XX million dollar plane.

Cheers Leo



Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineMutu From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 8452 times:

The one on the right looks suspect to me. SOme crazy flying, all that FOD to be picked up from the grass etc. Also I would have thought there would be dangerous buffetting with those intakes and exhausts so close to the ground. Fake IMHO

User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 8452 times:

I thought you guys knew about the new Russian anti-grav landing gear. It was developed so that Russian fighters could operate out of undeveloped fields and such. They got the idea from Star Wars and Luke Skywalker's speeder.

User currently offlineLongbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8193 times:

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 9):
Im sorry but what is wrong with you?? I mean WTF this picture is real and thats it, no its not a fake and yes its at an airshow, I the pilots know what they are doing... or they wouldnt be flying that as you stated XX million dollar plane.

Cheers Leo

I'd like more concrete evidence than "the pilot's know what they're doing." Obviously there's a lot of uncertainty about this pic, as shown by this message thread.


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8146 times:

Quoting Stratofortress (Thread starter):
Before everybody jumps all over me,

No jumping here. Good question.. crazy pilot.. real photo.

At least it was not the American Airlines 777 with the 'exploding' engine, or the Airtran A320 with the missing cowling..



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8086 times:

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 13):
or the Airtran A320 with the missing cowling..

That was a real shot...with a real accident report to go with it.


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7908 times:

I believe it is real.

Heat plume is air turbulence and it is affected by two things: The heat/velocity of the exhaust, and the length of time it has to work on a given parcel of atmosphere. A stationary runup produces far more heat shimmer than a fly-by. Turbine helicopters often produce more visible heat plume than do fighters.

Pilots push it pretty hard at some airshows. Some times they are given permission to fly in ground effect and sometimes there are no specific instructions. The risks taken here are no argument against the authenticity of the photo. After all, on a per-flying-hour basis, airshows destroy far more aircraft than wars do. Yes he might have crashed. And so what?

If you really want a flame war about it, put this in the Photography forum where it belongs. Second choice; put it in Military Av & Space where it also belongs.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7789 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 14):
That was a real shot...with a real accident report to go with it.

I didn't say it was not real. Just commenting on all the posts asking if it was real.. others saying it ws faked.. and the repeated times it's been up.



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineWorks4boeing From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 69 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7674 times:

Read Chuck Yeager's autobigraphy sometime. He has an excellent explanation of "riding the ground effect" and how that makes this type of flying relatively safe. Basically, as I understand the principle (and I make no claims about being an engineer, although I dated one once), at this altitude and speed, the plane is riding on a layer of air that's being compressed between the ground, and the plane itself. Unless the pilot intentionally drives the plane into the ground, it won't go lower than it is already. I think these shots are real.

User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7614 times:

The aircraft in both pictures is clearly the same. Tail numbers match, the wing load matches, as does the open fuel probe. It's highly unlikely that there would be a large array of pictures of the same aircraft in the same configuration available to be used as a source for photoshopping.

It's also extrodinarily unlikely that two photo's of the same aircraft performing the same manuever would be created by two different people.

Also, note in both pictures the blue smudge aft of the engines. In the picture with the aircraft faceing right, it is visable near the tip of the tailcome empanage. In the picture of the aircraft faceing left, it is seen trailing the red portion of the wing. This is likely the afterburner shockcone's visable manifestation. Clear indication that the aircraft is in flight.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7503 times:

Quoting Espion007 (Reply 5):
Also, 80% of the time of a photoshop image, Its easy to pull up the source image(s) off google image search.

not if it were his own image and he never put the original on the net anywhere  Smile

I must say I've my doubts about that image as well, and it doesn't just have to be a removed landing gear.
It's quite possible to transplant an image of an aircraft into another frame for example, which would explain the position off the centerline.
In fact, the apparently different colour balance and saturation between the aircraft and the rest of the frame suggests something like that.
The position of the control surfaces is also different from what I'd expect a low flying aircraft to use.
Refueling probe is out as well, kinda weird when flying with the gear up during a demonstration (you'd expect them to fly either clean or dirty, not like this).

None of that is of course enough to prove it's a composite, but it does make me wonder.

Then again, Russian demonstration crews have been known to do things that are downright dangerous and banned by western airshow organisers.



I wish I were flying
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...
Need Help With This Photo posted Thu Dec 27 2001 12:28:34 by BA777
I Need Some Help With This Photo posted Tue Oct 17 2006 16:35:21 by Bio15
Is This Photo Bad? Help Please? posted Tue Jan 17 2006 15:20:09 by Devil505x
Is This Photo Acceptable? posted Thu Oct 26 2006 21:03:09 by Sfilipowicz
A Quick "is This Photo Good Enough" Question... posted Sat Aug 5 2006 18:35:32 by Chris78cpr
Is This Photo Worth An Appeal? posted Sun Jul 9 2006 16:22:14 by AIRBUSRIDER
Need Help Regarding Possible Photo Theft posted Fri Apr 28 2006 09:59:52 by DLKAPA
Help: Is This Camera Worth Bidding On? posted Sun Apr 16 2006 23:28:45 by BradWray
Need Advice On This Photo posted Thu Apr 13 2006 21:33:39 by AIRBUSRIDER
Is This Photo Good Enough? posted Thu Apr 13 2006 08:37:37 by GertLOWG