Best fly-by picture ever? RAAF F-111...

[gaz]

The photographer did a hell of a job with this one.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5678469

[PeterG]

The photographer did a hell of a job with this one.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5678469

Holy s**t! 'Best fly-by' indeed! woot woot I wonder if anyone soiled their pants in terror there..

[Irish]

Sorry man,Looks PS'd to me??

[gaz]

I know it looks like it may well be but the thing that made it unlikely to me is that Michael Marston appears to be a professional photographer who makes his money by selling pictures to enthusiasts so it wouldn't make much sense to fake them, though obviously it can't be discounted.

[Flagg]

Nice photo.......very low altitude.....and judging by the contrail-like stuff forming above the wing-pivot.....pretty chunky air ;)

[JVeld]

Try this one !

[dr_newstead]

All aerial photos look 'PS-ed' on a clear day. My friend is an amateur photographer, I've got 100's of his pics, and some of them look so clear it's untrue. There's one of a KC-130, and the props are leaving little spiral contrails, like a helix. *That* looks Photoshopped, except I was there when he took it. Sometimes fact is stranger than fiction ;)

[Cabbage]

Sorry...that's photoshopped. I used to be a pretty nifty photoshopper myself.

People tend to forget the number one unwritten rule when PSing something....keep it realistic.

Now...you have a bastard of a plane churning out 200 decibels of jet noise...and everyone is looking the other way. rofl

[AlphaOneSix]

Try this one !

That one is an airbrush painting by Dru Blair. :)

[PeaceWithMyPiece]

They are Photoshopped.

First one is an RAAF F-111. Most likely taken at Avalon Air Show & rules stipulate there are no low passes anywhere near the crowds (esp. at the speed it is travelling from the air breaking on its wings)


Second pic would leave a upsurging wake in the water.

Fakes, but nice nevertheless.

[gaz]

Now...you have a bastard of a plane churning out 200 decibels of jet noise...and everyone is looking the other way. rofl
The person on the right is looking away, the person on the left (Wearing what appears to be a baseball cap) is looking towards it and there's no way to tell where the person on top is looking.
Other than that I'll be glad to hear reasons (Such as the one supplied by PWMP) why you think it's a photoshop.

[Cabbage]

Don't know...maybe I have a better system and monitor, but I can clearly see the person on top with his back turned towards the plane looking towards the ATF tower. I can see the lady (with shaggy perm) on the right looking away from the plane and to it's right. The guy next to her (with the baseball cap) is looking in the same direction as the other guy (i.e. towards the ATF tower).

So they are all looking away...

edit: ...hey apologies if it sounded like I was trying to ridcule you...I wasn't...more trying to ridicule the maker of said pic. People who have used PS before usually pick up on things which may not be obvious at first.

For example...look at the left wing of the plane. See it's all jumbled? That's a common problem when you PS. Trying to blend in with the background...so it comes all funny that way.

[AlphaOneSix]

Second pic would leave a upsurging wake in the water.

Again, the second one is a painting, not a Photoshop job.

[3Dguy]

If I may add my opinion as someone who uses Photoshop every day, if this is a fake it's a real good one. Cabbage pointed out that everyone is looking away at the tower. The F-111 is between the people on the top of the building and the tower so it is very possible that they are in fact looking up at the plane as it goes by. If it had managed to sneak up on those people, it would be highly likely that the woman looking away didn't notice its approach. Another note- The F-111's wings are swept, there's vapor coming off the wings, and I can see a faint hint of an afterburner trail on my monitor- this all adds up to one word- FAST. A fast moving fighter will be ahead of the "200 decibels" it produces. It will have flown over the crowd before you would even hear it and it would not be able to be heard until after it had passed.

[Hell Knight]

The photographer did a hell of a job with this one.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5678469

DAMN!:-P
Not an F111 but.............http://flightlevel350.com/viewer.php?id=2045

[Supe]

A fast moving fighter will be ahead of the "200 decibels" it produces. It will have flown over the crowd before you would even hear it and it would not be able to be heard until after it had passed.

I would have thought there would be health and safety concerns and liability issue here precluding the pilot from going so low. On this basis, I reckon pic has been altered.

[Cabbage]

If I may add my opinion as someone who uses Photoshop every day, if this is a fake it's a real good one. Cabbage pointed out that everyone is looking away at the tower. The F-111 is between the people on the top of the building and the tower so it is very possible that they are in fact looking up at the plane as it goes by. If it had managed to sneak up on those people, it would be highly likely that the woman looking away didn't notice its approach. Another note- The F-111's wings are swept, there's vapor coming off the wings, and I can see a faint hint of an afterburner trail on my monitor- this all adds up to one word- FAST. A fast moving fighter will be ahead of the "200 decibels" it produces. It will have flown over the crowd before you would even hear it and it would not be able to be heard until after it had passed.

Not to discredit you, but with all due respect I find many things wrong with your post. I've attended airshows in the past and am a great enthusiast of air displays, so I'm talking from a bit of experience as a spectator myself.

First of all, the plane must be taking off. No other scenario would allow it to be that low, at that upward attitude, with wings swept and afterburner on (if indeed AB is on as you state). Considering that, the spectators would have a lot of time to prepare, turn around and watch the take-off. I mean, apart from landing, there is nothing more which will keep a spectator at an airshow happy. So obviously the disinterest denoted by people casually looking away, is a big problem right there.

The other thing you touched on is that if it is moving at high speed the sound would be "delayed" as it were. Errr....no. I have never experienced a sound "delay" at an airshow simply because a sound delay would mean travelling passed the speed of sound. Surpassing the speed of sound is a no-no in an airshow because of the "sonic-boom" which is an unpleasent side-effect of going past mach 1. The last thing organisers want is to be sued because 7 year old Mary has a ruptured eardrum. So no...no sound "delay".

You do Photoshopping nearly everday, right? So explain why the left part of the plane (especially near the wing area) is blurred. The plane should either be all blurred or all clear, it can't be a bit blurred...if you've ever used an SLR camera, you'd know this. It's simply impossible... I'll tell you why it's a bit blurred...blending with Photoshop is a bugger to get right. That's why.

[XTC]

http://img493.imageshack.us/img493/6843/012om1.th.jpg (http://img493.imageshack.us/my.php?image=012om1.jpg)

[kuneho]

Did we just crash the jet photos servers since I can't see nuttin.

[Noob Brit]

The motion blur on the people doesn't look right to me but it's impossible to judge really. There'll be other photos of the event out there, only then will you be able to judge if it's real or not. It probably is real but the long lens totally distorts how close the aircraft is to those people - remember the "near miss" over London recently?

[Hullebullen]

Try this one !

Model railroad scenery in the foreground? It sure looks like it...

[gaz]

Don't know...maybe I have a better system and monitor, but I can clearly see the person on top with his back turned towards the plane looking towards the ATF tower. I can see the lady (with shaggy perm) on the right looking away from the plane and to it's right. The guy next to her (with the baseball cap) is looking in the same direction as the other guy (i.e. towards the ATF tower).

So they are all looking away...

edit: ...hey apologies if it sounded like I was trying to ridcule you...I wasn't...more trying to ridicule the maker of said pic. People who have used PS before usually pick up on things which may not be obvious at first.

For example...look at the left wing of the plane. See it's all jumbled? That's a common problem when you PS. Trying to blend in with the background...so it comes all funny that way.
The thought of you ridiculing me never entered my head, it's just that I don't agree with you about the spectators and I know nothing about photoshop so I asked for reasons in regard to that.

In relation to the blurring on the left wing, if it's caused by PS why is it that you can see the leading edge and the trailing edge perfectly clear but not the part in the middle? To me it looks like the blur is actually something on the rooftop in front of the aircraft that's blurred in just the same way the man to the right is. Part of it actually looks like a sound boom, perhaps a TV camera?


There'll be other photos of the event out there, only then will you be able to judge if it's real or not.
Another picture from the same event is here (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5617688), you can see the matching numbers on the nosewheel door and another one here (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5617686) (Though you can't be certain it's the same aircraft, you only have the photographers word) performing a dump and burn. It seems odd to me that he'd alter that one picture when he already has a pretty spectacular one of it.
Of course, if it altered why would you then put in on a website that's mostly frequented by aircraft spotters and other photographers? They're probably the two groups of people in the world most likely to see straight through it.

[Birsanc]

If this is photoshopped it's one of the best I've seen.

Someone would have had to put in a lot of time to give it this level of sophistication..
The consistency and quality of the pixel colour blend, from one object to the next, strongly suggests it's real.
http://i1.tinypic.com/oft6yf.jpghttp://i1.tinypic.com/oftvdk.jpg

[3Dguy]

Not to discredit you, but with all due respect I find many things wrong with your post. I've attended airshows in the past and am a great enthusiast of air displays, so I'm talking from a bit of experience as a spectator myself.

First of all, the plane must be taking off. No other scenario would allow it to be that low, at that upward attitude, with wings swept and afterburner on (if indeed AB is on as you state). Considering that, the spectators would have a lot of time to prepare, turn around and watch the take-off. I mean, apart from landing, there is nothing more which will keep a spectator at an airshow happy. So obviously the disinterest denoted by people casually looking away, is a big problem right there.

The other thing you touched on is that if it is moving at high speed the sound would be "delayed" as it were. Errr....no. I have never experienced a sound "delay" at an airshow simply because a sound delay would mean travelling passed the speed of sound. Surpassing the speed of sound is a no-no in an airshow because of the "sonic-boom" which is an unpleasent side-effect of going past mach 1. The last thing organisers want is to be sued because 7 year old Mary has a ruptured eardrum. So no...no sound "delay".

You do Photoshopping nearly everday, right? So explain why the left part of the plane (especially near the wing area) is blurred. The plane should either be all blurred or all clear, it can't be a bit blurred...if you've ever used an SLR camera, you'd know this. It's simply impossible... I'll tell you why it's a bit blurred...blending with Photoshop is a bugger to get right. That's why.
Cabbage, The F-111's wings would be extended straight out during takeoff, not swept. I have attended airshows for 20 years and I can say that when a jet is moving fast enough, you can't hear it approach. Only when it is in front of you or overhead do you then hear it. Sound delays don't start at the speed of sound. I'm not saying the photo is real. I'm saying that if it is fake, it's a good one. Now of course one has to take into account that those people would've been almost blown off the roof had the plane flew by that close and of course safetly rules prohibit doing so anyway, but I would think any pilot wanting to keep his career wouldn't fly that low. But it's a great pic though

[Birsanc]

I don't think it's fake and furthermore I believe the plane is a lot higher than it appears in the image. I believe the photographer used a zoom and this created a flattening effect to the image which in turn makes it appear the plane is much lower than it actually is.

The effect is highlighted and explained somewhat here:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/closedhl.asp

http://www.photozone.de/3Technology/demos/focalCompress.htm#
(http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/closedhl.asp)

[Birsanc]

....It probably is real but the long lens totally distorts how close the aircraft is to those people - remember the "near miss" over London recently?
Exactly.



....

[Abram]

Wow!
He sure did a hell of job with that picture!

greetings,

Abram

[sean18mb]

If this is a real photo, the people in the photo would be much blurrier. The airplane is moving fast, and panning the camera with the airplane would make the people very blurred. There is too much detail, even if using a very high shutter speed.

Oh, and I like this flyby picture alot:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/sean22mb/F-15E0162.jpg

[attackong]

Very Good, indeed!

[Birsanc]

Look out!
http://i1.tinypic.com/ogc5ja.jpg


It's real.

[Birsanc]

If this is a real photo, the people in the photo would be much blurrier. The airplane is moving fast, and panning the camera with the airplane would make the people very blurred. There is too much detail, even if using a very high shutter speed.

Oh, and I like this flyby picture alot:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/sean22mb/F-15E0162.jpg
By your logic alone, the mountains in the background of this image should be more blurred, especially since they are static, wouldn't you say? Is this a fake shot? I don't think so.

[sean18mb]

In the F-15 photo, the mountains are BEHIND the plane, meaning they are far away from the camera. The further away an object is, the less blurring will occur. In the F-111 photo, the people are between the plane and the camera, meaning any panning of the camera will have a much greater blurring effect.

[Zoomie]

In the F-15 photo, the mountains are BEHIND the plane, meaning they are far away from the camera. The further away an object is, the less blurring will occur. In the F-111 photo, the people are between the plane and the camera, meaning any panning of the camera will have a much greater blurring effect.
So....you're expecting it to really look like this?
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/7448/blur1br.jpg
:cantbeli:

[sean18mb]

It would probably look more like the photo below, possibly even more blur, depending on the speed of the plane and the focal length of the camera lens.

I have taken many photos at my brothers football games with 200mm and 400mm lenses, and even at 1/500 sec there is noticeable blur of anything in the foreground from the point of focus. Now an airplane travelling many times faster than a running human, when photographed closely like this, will cause stationary objects caught in the photo foreground (the spectators in this instance) to be blurred almost beyond recognition.

BTW, is anyone else having problems with this site? I keep getting a "www.militaryphotos.net can not be found" message. Other internet sites work fine, but just now trying to reply, I keep getting that message. It works, then it does not, then it works, then it does not :(
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/sean22mb/F-111.jpg

[sean18mb]

This is unrelated to the topic, but I found it amusing anyway. This link (http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/) has many photos of altered airliners to create interesting designs. I liked the fakes under the "modification type" drop down menu.

[Birsanc]

It would probably look more like the photo below, possibly even more blur, depending on the speed of the plane and the focal length of the camera lens.

I have taken many photos at my brothers football games with 200mm and 400mm lenses, and even at 1/500 sec there is noticeable blur of anything in the foreground from the point of focus. Now an airplane travelling many times faster than a running human, when photographed closely like this, will cause stationary objects caught in the photo foreground (the spectators in this instance) to be blurred almost beyond recognition.....


1/500 isn't too bad I suppose but it's my belief that the photographer is a professional and is more than likely to use a professional camera like the Nikon F6, capable of 1/8000 (8 frames per second). The Nikon D2X (digital) is also capable of 1/8000. I'm thinking that's more than adequate to capture the image as it was originally shown.

[sean18mb]

1/500 isn't too bad I suppose but it's my belief that the photographer is a professional and is more than likely to use a professional camera like the Nikon F6, capable of 1/8000 (8 frames per second). The Nikon D2X (digital) is also capable of 1/8000. I'm thinking that's more than adequate to capture the image as it was originally shown.

True, a prefessional will have excellent equipment. To me, though, it does not quite look right. Oh well, we could argue forever about the image being PSE'd or not, in any event it is a cool image.

[Birsanc]

...Oh well, we could argue forever about the image being PSE'd or not, in any event it is a cool image....
Agreed.



.....