Blue Angels Video - Is it a Fake?

[Ken Morano]

If you visit the following URL you'll see a video:
http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/fm00/Blues.html
the last portion of which shows what appears to be a Blue Angels F-18 roll
only to reveal that, in fact, it was 2 planes flying so close, the plane in
the background was completely obscured by the other.

I've stepped back and forth through this "footage" and I cannot believe it
is real. Those pilots are indeed praise worthy but the stunt captured in
this film looks too much like visual effects. The image of the one plane
simply separates from the other. Is there anyone here who can vouch for the
legitimacy of this video?

[Tomcat214]

Does not look real to me, good editing job. You can see the plane split into
2 planes. I too had too look 3 or 4 times.

"Ken Morano" > wrote in message
...
> If you visit the following URL you'll see a video:
> http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/fm00/Blues.html
> the last portion of which shows what appears to be a Blue Angels F-18 roll
> only to reveal that, in fact, it was 2 planes flying so close, the plane
in
> the background was completely obscured by the other.
>
> I've stepped back and forth through this "footage" and I cannot believe it
> is real. Those pilots are indeed praise worthy but the stunt captured in
> this film looks too much like visual effects. The image of the one plane
> simply separates from the other. Is there anyone here who can vouch for
the
> legitimacy of this video?
>
>

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
"Ken Morano" > wrote:

> If you visit the following URL you'll see a video:
> http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/fm00/Blues.html
> the last portion of which shows what appears to be a Blue Angels F-18 roll
> only to reveal that, in fact, it was 2 planes flying so close, the plane in
> the background was completely obscured by the other.
>
> I've stepped back and forth through this "footage" and I cannot believe it
> is real. Those pilots are indeed praise worthy but the stunt captured in
> this film looks too much like visual effects. The image of the one plane
> simply separates from the other. Is there anyone here who can vouch for the
> legitimacy of this video?

Well, if they did fake the last shot, they were really subtle about it,
since there are some reflections on the port wing on the front plane
that aren't there on the back plane. Might be video artifacts from the
process, though...

With a long enough lens, it's actually pretty easy to get an effect like
that in reality, since the difference in parallax would be small enough
to hide the other plane, if the angle was perfect.

Considering how many hundreds of hours there must be of Blue Angel
flights, I'd be shocked if something like this *didn't* happen in one or
two (the effect is only a couple of seconds before the separation).

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Scott Ferrin]

>Well, if they did fake the last shot, they were really subtle about it,
>since there are some reflections on the port wing on the front plane
>that aren't there on the back plane. Might be video artifacts from the
>process, though...

If you scrub back and forth right there you can see it's the same
highlight that just pops from one plane to the next because it's the
same plane albeit a frame or two different.




>
>With a long enough lens, it's actually pretty easy to get an effect like
>that in reality, since the difference in parallax would be small enough
>to hide the other plane, if the angle was perfect.

If you look at it and follow the path the rails on the wingtips and
the canopies follow it looks pretty clear that it's an edit.





>
>Considering how many hundreds of hours there must be of Blue Angel
>flights, I'd be shocked if something like this *didn't* happen in one or
>two (the effect is only a couple of seconds before the separation).


At first I'd have thought it was the real deal because of the
publication. After looking at it though my money would be that it's
edited. If it isn't though it's definietly a head scratcher :-)

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
Scott Ferrin > wrote:

> >Well, if they did fake the last shot, they were really subtle about it,
> >since there are some reflections on the port wing on the front plane
> >that aren't there on the back plane. Might be video artifacts from the
> >process, though...
>
> If you scrub back and forth right there you can see it's the same
> highlight that just pops from one plane to the next because it's the
> same plane albeit a frame or two different.

Similar, but a different size and shape. Which would make sense, with
two planes at about the same angle. The difference really comes out
when you kick up the brightness on the clip.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.