Size does matter

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:24 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

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.

Whatever... Everyone is a photo detective these days.

You might want to take a look at the other reasons I listed which make it
look like a fake too.

I did and I do not agree with you. I believe the picture is authentic, for
in my opinion the shadows line up correctly.

What's not to believe? The aircraft is on short final at a major US
airport. Instead some have to make yet another conspiracy out of nothing.
Sheesh.


--
Peter

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:40:42 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:24 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

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.

Whatever... Everyone is a photo detective these days.

You might want to take a look at the other reasons I listed which make it
look like a fake too.

I did and I do not agree with you. I believe the picture is authentic, for
in my opinion the shadows line up correctly.

What's not to believe? The aircraft is on short final at a major US
airport. Instead some have to make yet another conspiracy out of nothing.
Sheesh.

I don't believe anyone said anything about a conspiracy. None is
required. And, believe it or not, photoshop editing is a very popular
past time. For some, their hobby is editing photos where they then get
their kicks passing it off as legitimate.

While I'm sorry that my opinion is that it's a fake (for many
stated reasons) upsets you, I'm still entitled to it.

Shesh is right.

Whimp! It's a high wing!

Stefan

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
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.

I disgree. The sun appears to be high and slightly to the left, nearly
directly overhead. The dark areas at the crest of the road and in the field
are something other than the shadow of the airplane.

However, that said...there's nothing about the photo that suggests it's a
fake.

* the fence to the left is consistent with an airport boundary,
* it's not unusual to see landing aircraft at that altitude that close
to a runway,
* the shadow of the airplane would be out of the frame, beyond the
bottom edge,
* the so-called "motion blur" of the cars is actually apparent on all
objects in the frame except the aircraft which suggests that the camera was
being panned to follow the airplane (a very common photographic technique,
and given the bright scene would result in the very minimal blurring seen
for the non-subject elements of the frame), and
* the so-called aliasing around the airplane is simply a combination of
JPEG artifacts and the consequence of having shrunk the image (they are
practically nonexistent in the larger version of the image)

As far as the question of whether it IS a fake or not, who can tell? It's a
digital photo, and you never can really know for sure (absent authentication
techniques for creating certifiable photos, of course). Some fakes are very
good. If this is a fake, it's one of the very good ones. But one should
ask themselves, why would anyone bother faking a photograph like this? It
would be easy enough to get an actual photograph, and there's no profit in
faking one.

I do think that if someone wants to be a photo detective (as Peter R.
says...everyone wants to be one these days ), they ought to learn more
about photography and digital images. Playing Sherlock works a lot better
if the "clues" one discovers are actually valid clues.

Pete

"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

"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:40:42 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:24 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

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.

Whatever... Everyone is a photo detective these days.

You might want to take a look at the other reasons I listed which make
it
look like a fake too.

I did and I do not agree with you. I believe the picture is authentic,
for
in my opinion the shadows line up correctly.

What's not to believe? The aircraft is on short final at a major US
airport. Instead some have to make yet another conspiracy out of
nothing.
Sheesh.

I don't believe anyone said anything about a conspiracy. None is
required. And, believe it or not, photoshop editing is a very popular
past time. For some, their hobby is editing photos where they then get
their kicks passing it off as legitimate.

While I'm sorry that my opinion is that it's a fake (for many
stated reasons) upsets you, I'm still entitled to it.

Shesh is right.


It's real, your blind. Do you ref for the NBA?

---------------------------------------

On Tue, 11 May 2004 14:48:43 -0500, Darkwing Duck (The Duck, The Myth, The
Legend) wrote:


"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:40:42 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:24 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

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.

Whatever... Everyone is a photo detective these days.

You might want to take a look at the other reasons I listed which make
it
look like a fake too.

I did and I do not agree with you. I believe the picture is authentic,
for
in my opinion the shadows line up correctly.

What's not to believe? The aircraft is on short final at a major US
airport. Instead some have to make yet another conspiracy out of
nothing.
Sheesh.

I don't believe anyone said anything about a conspiracy. None is
required. And, believe it or not, photoshop editing is a very popular
past time. For some, their hobby is editing photos where they then get
their kicks passing it off as legitimate.

While I'm sorry that my opinion is that it's a fake (for many
stated reasons) upsets you, I'm still entitled to it.

Shesh is right.


It's real, your blind. Do you ref for the NBA?

---------------------------------------

And the trolls start to come out. Shesh.

"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.

One of these big boys damaged a couple of tied-down Cessnas with its jet
wash at my airport just yesterday. Both Cessnas, a 152 and a 172RG, have
(at least) bent control surface crank arms and cable gear. The control
locks were in place. The 152's tail tiedown ring is bent over sideways
and the rear fuselage may be twisted. Internal inspections have not been
completed.

The event was witnessed by an aviation mechanic who said both Cessnas
were "flopping on their tiedown ropes like fish" when the Antonov
blasted them.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 11 May 2004 14:48:43 -0500, Darkwing Duck (The Duck, The Myth, The
Legend) wrote:


"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:40:42 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:24 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Greg Copeland ) wrote:

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.

Whatever... Everyone is a photo detective these days.

You might want to take a look at the other reasons I listed which
make
it
look like a fake too.

I did and I do not agree with you. I believe the picture is
authentic,
for
in my opinion the shadows line up correctly.

What's not to believe? The aircraft is on short final at a major US
airport. Instead some have to make yet another conspiracy out of
nothing.
Sheesh.

I don't believe anyone said anything about a conspiracy. None is
required. And, believe it or not, photoshop editing is a very popular
past time. For some, their hobby is editing photos where they then get
their kicks passing it off as legitimate.

While I'm sorry that my opinion is that it's a fake (for many
stated reasons) upsets you, I'm still entitled to it.

Shesh is right.


It's real, your blind. Do you ref for the NBA?

---------------------------------------

And the trolls start to come out. Shesh.



Troll with a private.