Real or Photoshop?

[atlcrashpad]

That is REEL Bouyyyyy. Dat cat can FLY........

 

[LucyFurr]

definately real.

 

[flx757]

So LucyFurr...

You got banned as RJDC. I see you are back posting as one of your usernames that ISN'T currently banned...unlike the ones that ARE:

TheGuat, Rhoid, IHaveAPension, E170GuppyKiller, TheGuppyKiller, GuppyKiller, FreightNazi, TheMissingLink, OUT, 410Dude, EasyMac...

 

[FN FAL]

Being the great dissenter and devil's advocate sometimes, I'll just chime in with...hard to tell. All we can do is assume that it's photo-shop. Although I do lean with you guys, I wouldn't bet money that the picture is or is not real...not enough evidence either way.

I would have to say more proof would be needed to say it is real photo and not a fake, if I was on a jury.

 

[VNugget]

He could be doing a low pass over a runway that is closer to the camera than the one in the shot. That would be very unlikely though, as it would have to be a huge coincidence that there's a dark spot (or another, higher, airplane's shadow) right across from it, looking like it's its real shadow.

But... if it really is doing that low pass "as intended to be seen," it would seem like the shadow would need a much higher definition, rather than a general blob. Look at the plane in the background on the ground... you can see that there is no shadow between the wing and the HS. So, if it's that low and has that level of clarity, then we should reasonably expect that the one in the air (being equally low) to have an equal level of clarity.

 

[F9 Buff]

If it is a photo on airliners.net you can take it to the bank that it is real. Those photos are the most scrutinized in the world. The shadow is correct under the aircraft and there is no indication of any photoshop work done to the photo even when I adjust the levels, and brightness/contrast in photoshop. There was no gear removed, that is sure. Besides, look what the plane is over. If he had the gear out the right main would be in the grass. I know russian planes are tough but I doubt they taxi around like that. Also if you compare it to other photos you can see that he is slightly too high to have the gear out anyway. He is just a few feet higher than other photos of these planes taxiing around. Also to me, he looks to be slightly pitched up when compared to taxiing. I vote real!

 

[tej823]

Photoshop...if engines are running (and at high thrust) why no heat distortion on the area aft of the exhaust.

 

[VNugget]

Photoshop...if engines are running (and at high thrust) why no heat distortion on the area aft of the exhaust.

I think that totally depends on lighting conditions and a host of other photographic factors relating to lenses, focal distance, etc. I probably can't even think of.

 

[Mmmmmm Burritos]

C'mon guys, ground effect!!! Less drag = less lift needed = lower AOA. It's real!!!

 

[Mmmmmm Burritos]

Photoshop...if engines are running (and at high thrust) why no heat distortion on the area aft of the exhaust.

If the photoshopper can remove the landing gear and make it look THAT good, you better believe they would have blurred the area behind the engines. That's a pretty hefty detail to overlook when you're that talented at photoshop.