Nice Picture
The Cooler King
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In the Desert
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice Picture
Nice picture......
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/630283/L/
Probably should be in Spotter's Corner, but I thought it was nice and "technical" enough to post here!
Wayne
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/630283/L/
Probably should be in Spotter's Corner, but I thought it was nice and "technical" enough to post here!
Wayne
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you double-dog sure this is not a Photoshop creation? I'm very suspicious. What is this furrow being carved through? Low level fog, and viewed down the runway? Or low level stratus (in which case the viewpoint raises suspicions)? I have seen this sort of effect on aeroplanes flying through the tops of low level stratus, but not like this. This doesn't seem to be vortex- it just doesn't look right.
I tend to agree that it doesn't look quite right but I've never seen it produced by a 747. My window overlooks the threshold of SDU and I frequently see 737s and A319s blasting up through thin low cloud. My view is from directly behind, exactly as in the photo here, as they bank left to skirt Sugar Loaf. You can really only see the vortices well when there's a contrasting background, usually darker. When you do, my recollection is they're broader and more prounounced as twins rather than what almost looks like a single cone in this photo.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northwest England
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notso
Indeed! As a photographer myself, I am hesitant to throw stones, but without an explanation of his technique and situation, I, too, am suspicious.
If I am wrong, then I am very impressed!
ND
Indeed! As a photographer myself, I am hesitant to throw stones, but without an explanation of his technique and situation, I, too, am suspicious.
If I am wrong, then I am very impressed!
ND
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm glad someone else sees it as suspicious. I contend this is a sight one would never see without following a 747 directly in its wake through mist at just the right humidity and temperature conditions. In which case you are in a serious wake vortex problem position. It just smacks of 'too perfect'.
However if I am wrong, I apologise, but I think it reeks of Photoshop!
However if I am wrong, I apologise, but I think it reeks of Photoshop!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Front Padock
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umm, I saw it this morning and thought wow, but now I read some doubts, I too doubt,
If one was on the threshold, directly behind and the aircraft was climbing up through a level of fog, wouldn't that cause the effect?
Fog can gather in valleys and low areas, bee quite dense and then one breaks through it. You can see that where the aircraft has punched through it.
It could have been taken from the next aircraft to take off, we dont actually know how far away he is from teh photographer and Trailing Vortices move down ward and away from the aircraft - if I remember correctly.
still - its got us taking about it anyway!!
Hay Ewe - is that real?
If one was on the threshold, directly behind and the aircraft was climbing up through a level of fog, wouldn't that cause the effect?
Fog can gather in valleys and low areas, bee quite dense and then one breaks through it. You can see that where the aircraft has punched through it.
It could have been taken from the next aircraft to take off, we dont actually know how far away he is from teh photographer and Trailing Vortices move down ward and away from the aircraft - if I remember correctly.
still - its got us taking about it anyway!!
Hay Ewe - is that real?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've observed a similar effect at MAN. It was one of those afternoons where the weather was changing constantly. A 747 on approach at about 500 feet created the same effect, but it was just too far away for my kit.
Such a shot is possible with a 400-500mm lens. The distance compression effect on a telephoto lense can also create the illusion of a shallower angle between shooter and object, thus creating a false 'air to air' appearance.
I'm fairly confident it's genuine. There's nothing to stop you emailing the photographer, who I'm sure would be happy to tell you how he got the shot.
Such a shot is possible with a 400-500mm lens. The distance compression effect on a telephoto lense can also create the illusion of a shallower angle between shooter and object, thus creating a false 'air to air' appearance.
I'm fairly confident it's genuine. There's nothing to stop you emailing the photographer, who I'm sure would be happy to tell you how he got the shot.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, that takes some working out
I don't think that the lighter elements are actually wake behind the aircraft, but rather light braking through some higher cloud beyond. I am suspiscious of the shape of the lighter area though.
(P'shop helping hand)?
I flew out of EBOS a few weeks ago and saw some amazing cloud/light as we approached the Thames estuary so I shall hold off.
I don't think that the lighter elements are actually wake behind the aircraft, but rather light braking through some higher cloud beyond. I am suspiscious of the shape of the lighter area though.
(P'shop helping hand)?
I flew out of EBOS a few weeks ago and saw some amazing cloud/light as we approached the Thames estuary so I shall hold off.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at the top-right corner, you can see a solid band that arcs around to the centre of the image, which pretty much says that the image has been manipulated.
Shame if I'm right, 'cos I thought it was a helluva pic when I first saw it. But the solid band gives it away! Almost a very good piece of digital manipulation and, even if it is fake, it still looks great.
God I'm dull for noticing that - must leave the house more...
Shame if I'm right, 'cos I thought it was a helluva pic when I first saw it. But the solid band gives it away! Almost a very good piece of digital manipulation and, even if it is fake, it still looks great.
God I'm dull for noticing that - must leave the house more...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree- that dark band is in no way 'natural'. If you look at the smokey stuff, you can see a separate layer in the picture underneath which is another picture of a 747 taking off into a cloudy background. The cloudy background is visible through the smokey layer, yet a smokey foreground like that would completely obscure the background- you are obviously looking through some depth of mistiness.
I believe it is a simple merge of 2 pictures- I think the foreground wispy smoke is from a Photoshop plugin. If that's the case, to try to pass it off as 'look at my wonderful photograph' is disgraceful. It's a work of art, like those pictures of high altitude jets flying across the face of the sun or the moon, not a 'photograph'.
If you search for his other photographic contributions, it consists of a picture of an Airbus 320, and that's it!
I believe it is a simple merge of 2 pictures- I think the foreground wispy smoke is from a Photoshop plugin. If that's the case, to try to pass it off as 'look at my wonderful photograph' is disgraceful. It's a work of art, like those pictures of high altitude jets flying across the face of the sun or the moon, not a 'photograph'.
If you search for his other photographic contributions, it consists of a picture of an Airbus 320, and that's it!
Dammit, how irritating this is! First of all, I know a picture like this is possible because I've seen the aircraft/cloud/vortex combination from my 11th storey livingroom window near a threshold.
Second, I know seeing it's rare because I still can't ignore an aircraft taking off and, after five years in the same building and thousands of departures from the adjacent runway, I've only seen the combination mentioned above two or three times.
Third, those I have seen seemed different, wider cones, a bit more ragged edges to the cones and the cloud was much less dense than in the "nice photo" this thread refers to.
Fourth, I dreadi having to take the Nikon and 350mm lens out of storage, actually putting film into the thing and sitting by the window waiting for a shot just to prove a point.
If that picture was taken from the ground, even with a 500mm lens, wouldn't there still have been something in the way of extended flaps? The 747 in the photo looks whistle-clean.
The cloud formation in the background shouts altitude over 10,000ft. If the shot was taken from the air, surely it would be a very reckless person who, even with a 1000mm lens, would wilfully put his aircraft directly in the wake of a 747?
I also noticed that darker ring in the photo, but not the other aircraft.
Enuff arreddy
Second, I know seeing it's rare because I still can't ignore an aircraft taking off and, after five years in the same building and thousands of departures from the adjacent runway, I've only seen the combination mentioned above two or three times.
Third, those I have seen seemed different, wider cones, a bit more ragged edges to the cones and the cloud was much less dense than in the "nice photo" this thread refers to.
Fourth, I dreadi having to take the Nikon and 350mm lens out of storage, actually putting film into the thing and sitting by the window waiting for a shot just to prove a point.
If that picture was taken from the ground, even with a 500mm lens, wouldn't there still have been something in the way of extended flaps? The 747 in the photo looks whistle-clean.
The cloud formation in the background shouts altitude over 10,000ft. If the shot was taken from the air, surely it would be a very reckless person who, even with a 1000mm lens, would wilfully put his aircraft directly in the wake of a 747?
I also noticed that darker ring in the photo, but not the other aircraft.
Enuff arreddy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That dark ring. The only rings you get like that are the 22 1/2 degree rings you get around a light source like the sun or moon in diffused misty light......except it's light, not dark. It is caused by internal refraction and reflection in water drops and appears as a ring- especially noticeable with a full moon and light cloud some nights. I guess this one is 'dark light'! Every time I look at this picture it becomes more fake.
The Cooler King
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In the Desert
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow!
Never in a million years would I have thought that one of my postings would cause so much debate....
I posted it in haste because I was working and didn't really have time to check it out. I will email the photographer in question to see if it's fake...... in the meantime ....... is this one fake too?
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...tic=yes&size=L
there's no-one getting sucked into the engines luckily!!
Wayne
Never in a million years would I have thought that one of my postings would cause so much debate....
I posted it in haste because I was working and didn't really have time to check it out. I will email the photographer in question to see if it's fake...... in the meantime ....... is this one fake too?
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...tic=yes&size=L
there's no-one getting sucked into the engines luckily!!
Wayne
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was an interesting picture to take apart- it was right to post it! I have reported to airliners.net that in my opinion it is a Photoshop montage.
Now for the birds. I don't for a moment think the birds and the aeroplane are in exactly the same bit of sky. There are no bodies falling below the aeroplane. It is a telephoto shot- there may be many hundreds of meters between them.
Come on- let's have another!
Now for the birds. I don't for a moment think the birds and the aeroplane are in exactly the same bit of sky. There are no bodies falling below the aeroplane. It is a telephoto shot- there may be many hundreds of meters between them.
Come on- let's have another!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australandnewzealandland
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well... I emailed the guy.
And this is what he told me:
"there was a big bank of clouds heading my way, the 747 departed straight into them, as a result the picture
(the "hart" was created by vortex)."
Gimmee a medal.
"there was a big bank of clouds heading my way, the 747 departed straight into them, as a result the picture
(the "hart" was created by vortex)."Gimmee a medal.
No Farrell, not fake at all. Tele lens and the flock of whatever it is seems well to the right of the landing aircraft.
I for one look forward with interest to the result of your enquiries and hope that Stefan G does explain how he managed that shot.
I for one look forward with interest to the result of your enquiries and hope that Stefan G does explain how he managed that shot.