Typhoon....call sign Havoc.

Impressive. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but I'm assuming these are down in Wales? Are those roads open to the public as the planes go over?
 
J Veitch said:
Impressive. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but I'm assuming these are down in Wales? Are those roads open to the public as the planes go over?
Click to expand...
I believe they're probably taken in the 'Mach Loop', which as you rightly say is in Wales.

Roads are open to the public too as far as I'm aware. Not somewhere I've ever been as it's just too far away sadly. I remember growing up as a kid in the borders and seeing low flying harriers and tornados overhead. I'd love to go one day.
 
Last edited:
It's deceptive but the jet is something like 600 feet above the road.
Road is open
 
I bet at 600 feet it could still give you a surprise driving along :)
 
J Veitch said:
I bet at 600 feet it could still give you a surprise driving along :)
Click to expand...

Have you heard a Tiffy, the F15 and F22 seem to have silencers compared to these beasts.
Robmac.......outstanding shots, OUTSTANDING
 
Fantastic shots there,would you manage to get anything decent with a 200m lens?.:)
 
That's a crop so I over fill when they are closer.
200mm on a crop sensor will nab you some shots mate
 
It is a canon 6d i have FF
 
Certain locations will be fine and if the light is there your lens will take a TC
 
Cheers,your shots are brilliant.:):clap:
 
Are you saying that its two different aircraft or the same one in two separate shots? That you have not composited either image?
 
Last edited:
If your Typhoons were shot as you claim, this is what they would closely resemble

Typhoon flat.jpg
 
Last edited:
purpleclouds said:
..with a slower shutter speed perhaps.
Click to expand...

I have done my homework using lines of reference leaving only one possible conclusion, its the same jet image composed on different backgrounds. I make the claim based on irrefutable geometrical reference that puts both images of the jet at exactly the same rate of bank. While not impossible, it is a probability I would think would have odds of millions to one. There is no doubt in my mind that these are composites and the OP says they are not. I am so certain of this, and is why I have no reservations in making my claim. I also will have no reservations to promptly, with appropriate humility, apologise if proven wrong.:help:
 
Last edited:
I will post a video of my process and show you that the two images are exactly the same, they were masked and placed on two separate backgrounds. They are in exactly the same attitude in allegedly two different shots. Just not remotely possible. It will take me a couple of weeks to get my computer running video. I have been doing this kind of work for more than twenty years and can spot a composite in seconds. You made a lot of mistakes and omissions, but what you got right you did very skillfully, I like your attempt at the jet blast covering the road and how you distorted the road centre lines, but you did not get that quite right as the work you did shows what would be seen with the engines at idle. The exhaust cowlings are closed in your photo indicating this jet is at full thrust, at its AGL the background would show a lot of motion blur as I attempted to show in my edit.

There's more and I will be glad to build my case with the upcoming video once I get the bugs out of my PC. Take a look at the cockpit in both images, how likely would it be to have exactly the same orientation in two separate flyby's? The photos according to the background were supposedly taken from two different places with a point of view that by default would be different and the jet at a different attitude, yet you tell me that this is not a composite using the same jet image on two different backgrounds. I can scale both the jet images and overlap them perfectly to show this aircraft photo was copied and pasted. You did make an attempt to disguise by changing the size of one of the images, but in all other respects it is an exact replica and will perfectly overlap the copy.

In the 3D world, when you have a fixed point of view, a 3D object when moved or rotated slightly, will appear to change shape, an illusion, but the reality is, some surfaces will be obscured by others that rotate to the foreground. A case in example is the cockpit in your photo that is partially obscured by the canard, what are the chances that they would appear exactly the same in two separate shots in two separate flyby's? I'm sure you will have a lot of support from the forum and I'm likely to get a lot of hate mail over this, but I'm equally sure my observations are right. If I'm wrong, as I already said, I will humbly apologise and eat crow.:cool:
 
Last edited:
Right......before you do all crap,put money on it.
It will be donated to help for heroes and
ANYONE on here who wants the raw images can have them!
I've been going to the Mach loop for 10 years and I have NEVERdone a comp image!!

You can say they are crap images,they are boring whatever but don't accuse me of lying
 
It's burst images from the same jet on its pass past me!
 
It is good work, very skilled, the geometry though is a dead giveaway. I at no time called them crap images, I called them composites and will be glad to prove it with a video of the process. Logic alone cannot be denied the angles and geometry are exactly the same regardless of the change in scale. But the PP is very skilled although the OP was defeated by not knowing what he doesn't know. We are all in that same boat, but with different levels of knowledge.

If the OP can provide irrefutable graphic proof that I am wrong, then I will apologise, in fact I will do more than that. I went through a similar experience in this forum and was by insinuation accused of messing with a landscape, supposedly combining two images. I had the RAW files to prove that was not the case. I offered to provide them but changed my mind when I was not able to make a copy of the DNG file. If someone can tell me how that is done, I will be most grateful. I'm not on a witch hunt here, just like to deal with togs on a level of trust that I expect to receive with regard to my work. If I create a composite, that's what I call it.
 
Last edited:
robmac said:
Like I said send me your email and I'll send the raw files to you!
Click to expand...

I will get right on that with a PM. :runaway: Would someone please tell me how to send a personal mail to Rob? I have not used that app before.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top