![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/573107/M/
HECTOP PP-ASEL-IA http://www.maxho.com maxho_at_maxho.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 11 May 2004 10:27:36 -0400, HECTOP wrote:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/573107/M/ HECTOP PP-ASEL-IA http://www.maxho.com maxho_at_maxho.com Why does it look like that plane was "photoshopped" in? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There is no shadow.
Why does it look like that plane was "photoshopped" in? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 11 May 2004 16:36:31 +0000, Al wrote:
There is no shadow. Why does it look like that plane was "photoshopped" in? Ya, it was a rhetorical question. Aside from the fact that there is no shadow, the other objects in the photo have fairly soft edges whereas the plane has a harsh anti-aliased outline. To me, it jumps out as being fake before you even notice the lack of shadow. In otherwords, the "crispness" of the phane does not match that of other objects at the same distance. There is also no motion blurr on the plane even though it obvious on the cars. ![]() Cheers! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greg Copeland ) wrote:
Aside from the fact that there is no shadow, Look again. There is a shadow, just at the crest of the road. -- Peter |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 11 May 2004 12:57:13 -0400, Peter R. wrote:
Greg Copeland ) wrote: Aside from the fact that there is no shadow, Look again. There is a shadow, just at the crest of the road. If that's the shadow to the plane, the angle doesn't appear to match any others. All the other shadows would appear to place the sun directly overhead. Which means, if what you're calling a shadow is supposed to be coming from the plane, it was put in badly. Otherwise, we'd have to simply call it an unidentified dark area in the picture. Furthermore, look at where the shadow is cast under the wing. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news ![]() On Tue, 11 May 2004 16:36:31 +0000, Al wrote: There is no shadow. Why does it look like that plane was "photoshopped" in? Ya, it was a rhetorical question. Aside from the fact that there is no shadow, the other objects in the photo have fairly soft edges whereas the plane has a harsh anti-aliased outline. To me, it jumps out as being fake before you even notice the lack of shadow. In otherwords, the "crispness" of the phane does not match that of other objects at the same distance. There is also no motion blurr on the plane even though it obvious on the cars. ![]() The shadows are there, and you don't get a motion blur on a target if you follow it with your camera. An-124s are known to fly into BWI, and the picture seems pretty consistent with the information the author provided. From what I can tell (of course, to err is human), the picture was taken at Dorsey Rd, Glen Burnie, MD (McPherson, Friendship Park), the Ruslan is landing 33L in the afternoon. The METAR data for that time fit what you see on the picture pretty good. And if the picture looks suspicious to you, you can always ask the author, the contact link is right there next to the picture. Cheers! Dima |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dima Volodin" wrote in message news:M39oc.30039$iy5.19659@okepread05... The shadows are there, and you don't get a motion blur on a target if you follow it with your camera. If you pan the camera to eliminate blur for a moving object, then you expect to see blur on stationary objects. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Greg Copeland" wrote in message In otherwords, the "crispness" of the phane does not match that of other objects at the same distance. There is also no motion blurr on the plane even though it obvious on the cars. ![]() Could it be because the photographer was tracking the plane? I noticed there's a guy looking at what appears to be the plane in the lower right corner, meaning somebody is looking at -something-. There is a noticeable lack of brakelights and skidmarks from the cars to suggest that the driver was distracted (or a pilot, and geeking completely out) by the airplane. An airplane like that used to land at Moffett (it's an AN-134, I believe). Spent several hours watching semis drive in through the tail and exit through the nose. The plane is that big. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Al wrote: There is no shadow. Yes, there is. The fuselage shadow runs along the top of the crest of the road. Shadows of the wings and tail extend into the green field behind the plane. From the angle of the wing shadow on the side of the fuselage, the ground shadows are where one would expect them to be. George Patterson If you don't tell lies, you never have to remember what you said. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stop The Noise petitions FAA to increase N number size | Earl Grieda | Piloting | 19 | April 26th 04 04:46 AM |
Former Air Force official pleads guilty to conspiracy in Boeing matter | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | April 21st 04 12:16 AM |
Puget Sound TFRs reduced in size - charted here | David H | Owning | 3 | January 10th 04 06:01 AM |
Puget Sound TFRs reduced in size, turned into National Security Areas | C J Campbell | Piloting | 4 | January 10th 04 06:01 AM |
Trike wing bolt size | Aaron Smith | Home Built | 0 | September 30th 03 03:02 AM |