jasond
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:23 am

Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:24 am

I am sure all of these are fakes given what seems to be some Photoshop trickery at work. Comments welcome.







Interestingly one of them appears to have the remains of an ANet watermark that has been deliberately fudged out.
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:30 am

first one idk but it is a a.net photo, second is fake see www.snopes.com and also an a.net photo. and third idk either.
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
pilotdude09
Posts: 1335
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:35 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:31 am

The AA one looks quite real, but who knows
cheers
Qantas, Still calling Australia Home.........
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:32 am

1/ The fact that the photographer's name has partially been erased flags this one as a fake, not to mention we'd have read about it the incident.

2/ Widely discussed here on a.net as a hoax, and identifiable as such due to the "fire" not showing up in the reflection of the same engine on the fuselage.

3/ I thought that one was real, based upon what I recall was the photo's listing here on A.net, but after looking at this one, it almost looks like the one in the original post could have been taken a second or two after this one....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Arcellana



I don't use Photoshop, and am thus no expert on it, so I'll defer to those that are...

[Edited 2005-11-14 02:48:11]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
jasond
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:23 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:37 am

I am unsure about the third one. The second seems to be 'confirmed' as a fake. The only things that lead me to believe the first is a fake is that there appears to be no evidence of gear compression on the starboard side and the fact that the 'smoke' etc looks to layered over the top.
 
flypdx
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 3:19 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:37 am

1 looks the most realistic of the three.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7797
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:38 am

Fake, Fake, Fake.....
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
JrMafia90
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 7:36 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:12 am

Pretty bad editing. You can tell they are fake.
 
jasond
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:23 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:29 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 3):
3/ I thought that one was real, based upon what I recall was the photo's listing here on A.net, but after looking at this one, it almost looks like the one in the original post could have been taken a second or two after this one....

I reckon the image you posted was what this 'fake' was based on. The position of the vertical tail is in the same position in relation to the buildings in the background. Given the speed of the aircraft at the time if it were two different pictures you would see some distance between the two I would have thought. Looks like a simple rotation done in Photpshop to me. For what it is worth I think all of these are fakes and as 'interesting' as they are, is there a place for them on ANet? I'm not sure. Incidently they were sent to me by a colleague who is a non aviation enthusiast. He thought they were real. Thankyou all for your comments.

Quoting JrMafia90 (Reply 7):
Pretty bad editing. You can tell they are fake.

My sister uses Photoshop professionally and although she has no background in aviation at all she thought the work was very poor.
 
GEEZ
Posts: 715
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:55 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:33 am

All fake!

What kind of sad, lonely, pathetic, morbid, juvenile kind of twat would sit there and take time to edit a picture to create that effect anyway???

If the idiots responsible for those pics are viewing this...

GET A LIFE!!!!

Chris  wave 
If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it... UNLESS it's a crap AFCAD!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:37 am

We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
Trolley Dolley
Posts: 548
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2000 1:57 pm

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:55 am

All faked poorly.
1) If you look at the far right hand tire of the right and main body gear, you can see the very bad cutting job they've done. It's not circular.
2) Apart from the afore mentioned lack of fire reflection in the fuselage, there is absolutely no black smoke from the burning petrol. Just think of the awful pictures of Concorde or the 9/11 impacts.
3) You can clearly see the egding around the tail where it has been cut out.
 
BMIFlyer
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:03 pm

Ok, this.....



is actually a cut up, turn and paste job of this.....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Daniel Werner



It is a very bad edit  Yeah sure

How do I know it was this pic?

Look at the grass in front, and the treeline in the background, and the runway markings.


Thanks


Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
MarshalN
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:39 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:25 pm

The third one is a fake because the aircraft was already in the air. The "runway" in that one is clearly a taxiway/runway in the back. The aircraft just happens to be riding over it -- the actual runway is the thing you see in the bottom.
 
AR1300
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:22 pm

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:03 pm

MMM.....don't think so.Is rotating.Look at the shadow(dim one).But still a fake.
C'mon, all look so fake!!!Is there a need to explain???


Mike
You are now free to move about the cabin
 
N766UA
Posts: 7843
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 2:43 pm

Yeah all 3 are fake. You don't even need proof just take a close look and it's obvious. Gotta love how the one is an airliners.net photo too. If I were the photographer I'd be royally pissed.
This Website Censors Me
 
QantasHeavy
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 4:47 pm

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:55 pm

3rd one is an optical illusion... it is not landing on the "top" runway... it is a few feet above the bottom one. FAKE taikl strike skid added to top runway which is actually in the background... just that wheels are in just the right spot.
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:48 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 10):
Fake

I actually saw the same picture of the fake 747 blowing up with AC livery.

If I'm not mistaken, the rear fuselage of the aircraft is taken from a video/picture of a test done on a 747 (at RAF Bruntingthorpe?) to see what happens when a bomb explodes in the rear cargo bay of an aircraft (post Lockerbie).
 
ANITIX87
Posts: 2953
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:49 am

Quoting QantasHeavy (Reply 16):
it is not landing on the "top" runway... it is a few feet above the bottom one.

I don't think this one (the REAL one) actually is an optical illusion. It seems to me that you can see the jet-blast coming out of the engine and then being deflected parallel to the ground on which the aircraft appears to be. This tells me it is actually in contact. Plus, the near runway is a LOT closer then the far one, and I think if it were actually above the closer one the plane would appear much larger relative to the buildings.

Just my two cents, I could be wrong.

TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:57 am

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 18):

I don't think this one (the REAL one) actually is an optical illusion. It seems to me that you can see the jet-blast coming out of the engine and then being deflected parallel to the ground on which the aircraft appears to be. This tells me it is actually in contact. Plus, the near runway is a LOT closer then the far one, and I think if it were actually above the closer one the plane would appear much larger relative to the buildings.

You can also tell that it's still on the ground because of the angle of the main gear. If they had left the ground, they would be angled like this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Remi Dallot



Harry
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
alasdaironeil
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 7:29 pm

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:13 am

1 is a fake because a wing wouldn't break like that.

The wing is far more flexible and if it was to break, it would break further down the span.

If you watch the static loading tests, the wings break further down the span, not near the tips.
失去在翻譯 - Lost in Translation
 
jmc757
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 3:36 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:23 am

Ok they're all fakes, but they're not too bad and look fairly impressive (in a strange kind of way!).

Quoting GEEZ (Reply 9):
What kind of sad, lonely, pathetic, morbid, juvenile kind of twat would sit there and take time to edit a picture to create that effect anyway???

If the idiots responsible for those pics are viewing this...

Its not these people you have to worry about. Ok, its may be a little strange, but the people who made these are just having a little fun playing around in photoshop. They're not hurting anyone, and I for one think the results are fairly impressive (again in a strange kind of way!)

On the other hand, there are some very strange morbid, even twisted people that do something rather different - faking ACTUAL accident photos. Helios 737 photos come to mind as well as a number of 9/11 "photos". That another level all together.
 
TheCheese
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 8:39 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:30 am

In the third one, you can see that the 'shopper duped the windows on the building on the left to cover where the plane had been: the four rows of windows at the top of the building are identical with the four rows below that.

Also, if you look at the nose gear, you can see that they didn't bother trimming the eave line of the building behind the gear out, and they left the shadow of the nosewheel on the hangar door.

Plus, that picture has the look of someone using Unsharp Mask to hide the artifactation left behind from the photomanipulation. That's the fuzziness; the real picture is in focus.

So. Very. Fake.
 
MissedApproach
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:12 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:03 am

Quoting N766UA (Reply 15):
Gotta love how the one is an airliners.net photo too. If I were the photographer I'd be royally pissed.

I often see A.net photos floating around in emails & powerpoints, usually with the copyright cut off the bottom. Very irritating. What are they trying to hide?

Oh, & I think all the photos at the top are pretty blatantly altered.
Can you hear me now?
 
AlitaliaMD11
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:19 am

RE: Fake Accident Pictures?

Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:10 am

The B747 looks so cute in this photo! dopey 

No Vueling No Party