Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fake Picture!  
User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3306 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David McGuire



G-AWIW a MyTravel DC-10? I think not!

Andy

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineGAWZU From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 235 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3075 times:

Andy, I was just about to post exactly the same topic! G-AWIW is a 1947 STAMPE SV4B (whatever that is!) according to the CAA G-INFO website, and it's easy to see that the copyright credit on the photo, Bob Cross, doesnt match up with the apparent submitant, David McGuire.

Hmmmm...

Adam



User currently offlineSunilgupta From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 775 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3044 times:

it's easy to see that the copyright credit on the photo, Bob Cross, doesnt match up with the apparent submitant, David McGuire

But wait... the submitting photographer has no control over the tag line on the photo independent of the name they submit the photo under ... is this a screw up in the database?

With regard to the photo… it could be real. Just because the registration was previously used on some old bird does not mean it could not have been reassigned. Or it could be a temp registration.

Sunil


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3038 times:

Sunil - we've looked into this one.

a) UK reg's in the standard sequence aren't reassigned
b) examined closely in a graphics package you can see

- letter of the reg aren't aligned
- underwing reg just visible contains a Y
- edges of tail fin are not quite right
- shadow effect around tail engine is not right
- variations in noise/grain patterns
etc. etc.


c) sky in Shannon is a different shade of blue  Smile

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3028 times:

But it just looks so fake!

Go photoshop  Big thumbs up

LGW


User currently offlineLjungdahl From Sweden, joined Apr 2002, 907 posts, RR: 36
Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3036 times:


I mailed about this one to the admin a few hours ago (I usually do that, instead of starting threads about it...)  Big grin

Johan (Ljungdahl)


User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3013 times:

That one didn't last long!

Staffan


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3006 times:

Sunil said: Just because the registration was previously used on some old bird does not mean it could not have been reassigned.

Used registration numbers in the UK are never reassigned... Well, actually, there is one instance of this happening - G-BJCB was allocated to two different HS.125s. Since then, the UK CAA has not allowed re-use of registrations in the UK.

----

Johan (Ljungdahl) said: I mailed about this one to the admin a few hours ago (I usually do that, instead of starting threads about it...)

Johan (the boss) has said that threads about fakes are OK, as long as they are contructive! Big grin Big grin So please, raise a topic next time if you wish!!!!!

Andy


User currently offlineSabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2985 times:

Is there a way to see the large picture?

I really want to see how a fake one looks Big grin

/Frederic


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2967 times:

Frederic, the large picture has already been removed from the database - seems like those on high agree its a fake.

I suspect we screeners will soon get bombarded with an e-mail from an irate photographer (or more accurately photoshopper) indignantly asking why his picture has been removed from the database. Believe me, when this happens, most "fakers" are too stupid to accept they've been found out and actually argue back - arguing back in such cases just moves them more quickly towards the likelihood of a total ban!

Andy


User currently offlineApuneger From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 3032 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2961 times:

G-AWIW is a 1947 STAMPE SV4B (whatever that is!)

That should be a Stampe & Vertongen SV4B. Stampe & Vertongen was one of the very few Belgian aircraft manufacturers. Unless I'm wrong, one of their aircraft types (the SV4 I think) was even used in the Belgian air force for pilot training and stuff like that. I also think the SV4 was even used for commercial pilot training, loooooong ago...Not quite a modern widebody airliner, huh? Big grin Anyway, nice to see people are still scanning this database for fake pictures. Great job, guys!!


(copyright Daniël Brackx collection)


For more information, go to http://www.stampe.be.

Ivan



Ivan Coninx - Brussels Aviation Photography
User currently offlineSunilgupta From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 775 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2944 times:

I was just trying to give the guy the benefit of doubt, but looking at it a bit closer now I agree … fake… you can see individual pixel elements that don’t belong around the engine pylons, and perhaps the biggest giveaway – the faker forgot the lower part of the door outline on the rear pax door!

UK reg's in the standard sequence aren't reassigned

Hmm, didn’t realize that. You learn something new every day! Here in the US, the FAA routinely does reassign registrations as you know. It has confused us a number of times, especially with GA aircraft as the databases don’t get updated in real-time.

asking why his picture has been removed from the database

or maybe we are facing a new age of database terrorism… they try and sneak them in any way they can!

I found the large version cached on my PC… email if you want it.

I still don’t understand how the name on the photo did not match the name on the screen… can anyone explain?

Sunil


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9603 posts, RR: 69
Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2897 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

I thought this was a thread on more of Craig Murray's shots. Muwahahahahahahah  Big grin

User currently offlineLjungdahl From Sweden, joined Apr 2002, 907 posts, RR: 36
Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2889 times:

Andy (Skymonster),

I have mailed the admin in the past, about both photos that I've assumed to be fake (that one was voted down by the a.net crew...) and also about photos where I assumed that the submitter could impossible be the actual photographer (which was correct in a few cases, and voted down in a few other...)

Therefore I'm careful to start threads that could easily start that ol' "flaming" again...

...I have a rather good eye to spot errors, and combined with a "few" years experience of this hobby, I also submit a number of corrections...
(...it's quite unbelievable how hard it is to know what type of aircraft belonging to which airline wearing whatever registration you've just submitted a photo of...)

Just my $2  Big grin

Johan (Ljungdahl)


User currently offlineEGBB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2883 times:

It was the lack of any lamp posts that gave it away to me  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2870 times:

I thought it was the combination of United Kingdom and blue sky that gave it away.

Staffan


User currently offlinePH-OTO From Netherlands, joined Mar 2002, 434 posts, RR: 31
Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2813 times:

Andy, you wrote: "arguing back in such cases just moves them more quickly towards the likelihood of a total ban!"

Isn't a single fake picture of this magnitude enough for a total ban? You can hardly give this guy the benefit of the doubt, can you?
Do you have guidelines for banning people?

Martin Boschhuizen



Look very closely between the lines of this message, and you will see the captain beating up the jumpseater
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2797 times:

Oh oh - careful Staffan - Shannon isn't in the United Kingdom - there's more than a few Irish (esp. my wife!) who are very sensitive to such things  Smile

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2796 times:

I know, but I'm too far away from the UK (or Ireland) to have to worry about that Big grin

Actually I just guessed it was the UK, the photo was gone so I couldn't check...

Staffan  Smile


User currently offlineDan330 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 439 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2771 times:

Is there a MyTravel DC-10 in the full colours yet? Cause I haven't seen one!

If not, how was he able to fake it so well to get it accepted?


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2718 times:

Isn't a single fake picture of this magnitude enough for a total ban?

The guy who cloned a second F-18 into that air show formation fly-by photo recently got away with it!

Andy


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2728 times:

Sorry, I should say he got away without a total ban - the "fake" photo concerned was removed.

Andy


User currently offlineEGBB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2634 times:

May I ask if this was the screeners view or Johans as this in my opinion will only encourage rather than discourage people in the future from doing this.

This could in my opinion be the start of a much larger problem in the very near future and needs to be tackled now so everyone uploading knows what will (what should) happen if they upload such pictures not only if they get passed the screeners btw.

Derek Pedley.


User currently offlinePH-OTO From Netherlands, joined Mar 2002, 434 posts, RR: 31
Reply 23, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

I second that, Derek.
Picture this, though: someone has all of his pictures removed and it turns out that the alleged fake isn't fake after all. I mean, you have to be 100% sure that it really is fake. It is not that difficult with the Mytravel DC-10, but it is possible.
And what about the "vanishing lamppost"? Enough for a ban?

Oh , man. I shouldn't think so much so early in the morning  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Martin



Look very closely between the lines of this message, and you will see the captain beating up the jumpseater
User currently offlineEGBB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2590 times:

Martin,

The removing of an object like the lamp post will always be border case and will have to be left to the discretion of the screeners if this deters from the photo or not.

My main point is the adding of an object like an aircraft or livery like in the two recent examples we have seen. This is the area which concerns me and is an area that should be and could be dealt with.

Derek Pedley


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...
The Fake Picture posted Fri Sep 28 2001 22:48:55 by Jderden777
Probably A Fake Picture posted Thu Sep 27 2001 19:22:15 by Bruce
Is This Picture A Fake? posted Sun Dec 8 2002 05:54:49 by Delta777-XXX
Post Your Own Fake Airplane Picture Here posted Thu Dec 5 2002 05:47:52 by BR715-A1-30
Is This A Picture For The Database? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 18:18:20 by JetCrazy
Looking For Xtra Hi-res Picture posted Wed Nov 29 2006 21:33:38 by Jcded
Help Editing A Picture. posted Tue Nov 21 2006 04:55:31 by Xaapb
Anyone Care To Try Cleaning Up This Picture? posted Sun Nov 19 2006 02:09:31 by Matt D
Hi And 'Does This Picture Can Be Improved?' posted Mon Nov 6 2006 15:59:30 by FYODOR
Rejected Picture... posted Sun Nov 5 2006 00:22:58 by JetCrazy