Typhoon....call sign Havoc.

very strange

OK --------------- all back to TP and just dont post anymore - simples..(y)

BTW FYI ....i just wasted nearly an afternoon reading this from post #1 .....:(..
 
edit: see posts below, think it's just misuse / misunderstanding of lingo...

Erm, guys and gals

did we all miss the bit in his video where HE CLAIMS TO HAVE FLOWN THIS LOOP?!

at 8m40 ( at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzu7bU8uFTPrS0hDYnNJSWN0N1E/view ) where, and I shall quote:

"I've... I've flown the circuit often enough to know that..."

Turns out that Richard is actually from this side of the pond and a former low flying pilot too!

well gee.


howling at this thread.
 
Last edited:
OH, ok. My aviation terminology isn't too hot. Well that's less fun hah...
 
Probably just kiddie fairground aeroplanes is more like it ;)
 
In fairness I think he was talking generically about judging altitude based on his own experience of flying circuits or loops. Not this specific loop. He was IMHO about right with his estimate of 250ft too.

He's not right about pretty much everything else though:
1) Same shot of aircraft comp'd onto two different backgrounds - Nope
2) Two different shots of same aircraft comp'd onto two different backgrounds - Nope
3) As per 2, but this time both shots comp'd onto the same (wider) background - Nope
Etc. Etc....

The guy made an incorrect assumption and then painted himself into a corner by posting his view in this thread and by effectively calling Rob a liar.
Since then, he has continued digging and has refused to:
a) accept the obvious point that the two images are not Comp'd at all, but instead were taken in sequence and
b) man up and apologise to Rob.

Neither a or b are likely to happen as I think he gets off on all the attention it has drawn, and let's face it we've all had a good rant on the back of this thread...
 
We're trying to catchup the post count of the D750 thread not far to go now :)
 
MWHCVT said:
Maybe @Circuit Hero might be willing to chime in on this thread, as unless I'm very much mistaken in my remembering he has actually been in the hot seat through the loop several times, and is probably the very best qualified of anyone on the forum to validate these photos

Another member who would certainly be able to give some certain validity to the authenticity of these photos is @Cheesy however he has not been seen around the forum now for 18 months or so :(
Click to expand...

Hi mate, thanks for the shout. Probably wont surprise anyone (and I know Im a bit late) but these are clearly genuine - if nothing else the chap who pointed out the winglets on the drop tanks nailed it, but really anyone who has experience shooting in burst or aircraft knows it. To be honest its easier to draw on my experience behind the lens than in the cockpit to analyse these.

The main thing I dont understand is why there's apparently such a negative connotation attached to images being composites? If they were (which again to clarify, theyre not) then what difference does it make? Youre not misleading anyone; youre presenting art, not evidence. Composites take a lot of post production work to pull off accurately and arguably more technical camera work in many cases too.

Just my 2p. Regret spending the best part of 20mins reading this thread from start to finish if Im honest, you owe me 20mins of life Richard! :D

Great shots OP, keep up the good work.
 
Looking at the weird use of the like button tricky dicky is still watching this thread ... why he can't just be a man and apologise is anyones guess
 
Circuit Hero said:
The main thing I dont understand is why there's apparently such a negative connotation attached to images being composites? If they were (which again to clarify, theyre not) then what difference does it make? Youre not misleading anyone; youre presenting art, not evidence. Composites take a lot of post production work to pull off accurately and arguably more technical camera work in many cases too.
Click to expand...

That's something I've been thinking all along.

By no way am I a pro tog, or even a dedicated amatuer. I'm on here for help and advice, and look at the pros work - so I didn't want to say anything that may cause upset or offence. But yes, if they were a comp, then so what? I have 15+ years of photoshopping, and know that to pull of a realistic image from several images is bloody difficult. Sometimes it'd be "easier" to go into the field and try to snap what you want in the first place. Just like the OP has done here
 
If they had been a composition then this thread would have gone something like this.....
Rob: Here are some nice pics
Richard: These are composites
Rob: Yes
Richard: Nicely edited (well.... maybe not......)
end of thread ;)

It isn't that there is something wrong with composites, it is just that people like to know what they are looking at.
 
Composites are an artform in themselves and no longer becomes photography.

If I posted an image where I'd spent time composing it (in camera), waiting for the right light or action then someone said I'd put all the parts of an image together via PP, I'd be a little peeved (to say the least). I have nothing against composites and I've seen some good ones (and bad ones) but , like I say, it's a different art form.

This thread could be on danger of becoming a debate on what is to much PP rather than about the fantastic images posted!
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
@Richard C. Jones - please don't like my post - instead just apologise so that, in time, you can be accepted by the forum and contribute usefully instead of being forever labelled as "that bloke who wouldn't admit his mistake". You've clearly a lot of ability, but all the time you work this way it will be wasted.
Click to expand...

by (ironically/sarcastically) liking various posts Richard don't you think that you are compounding your felony ...... it is not particularly attractive to do so, in fact it is "taking the pass"

it also reflects on everything that you have ever said on this forum as being suspect

reaching now for the ignore button
 
Last edited:
skiking said:
Composites are an artform in themselves and no longer becomes photography.

If I posted an image where I'd spent time composing it (in camera), waiting for the right light or action then someone said I'd put all the parts of an image together via PP, I'd be a little peeved (to say the least). I have nothing against composites and I've seen some good ones (and bad ones) but , like I say, it's a different art form.

This thread could be on danger of becoming a debate on what is to much PP rather than about the fantastic images posted!
Click to expand...
This thread has drawn attention due to someone refusing to admit that their original accusation were incorrect, their continued assertion that the OP posted a composite when that is clearly not the case and their subsequent failure to apologise. It is not about the merits or otherwise of making and posting composite images.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
@Richard C. Jones - please don't like my post - instead just apologise so that, in time, you can be accepted by the forum and contribute usefully instead of being forever labelled as "that bloke who wouldn't admit his mistake". You've clearly a lot of ability, but all the time you work this way it will be wasted.
Click to expand...

My guess is that he was aiming for the "report" button and missed - considering the number of RTM's i've just picked up, all asking for his account and all his posts to be deleted from the forum...

Of course, as per the forum rules I've explained that we just don't do that sort of thing when people have already posted from the account.


(mod hat removed for a second...)
We certainly don't do that sort of thing to remove evidence that someone has effectively called a respected community member a cheat and a liar, and then, when proof has been provided, hasn't the decency to man up and actually apologise... (yes, I DID look at the RAW files provided, as I'm sure my fellow staffmembers did, even though there was no need whatsoever for the OP to go "above and beyond" like that...


(...hat back on)
Someone questioned WHY this thread hasn't been locked... well - it's simple - we've been keeping it open, in the belief that Richard might just decide to do the right thing. Seems that's not really his intention - but I'm willing to be proved wrong, so we'll give it just a little while longer I think...
 
Last edited:
Well, the man has previous for throwing his toy out of his pram. He seems quite disruptive and what he has done to Rob is inexcusable.
Short of banning him there are forum tools that other members could use ;)
 
He could be banned, or everybody could just add him to their ignore list. Then he can just quietly talk to himself.

I've read the entire thread, quiet entertaining except for that video, that was worse than watching paint dry. I did get to around 4 minutes though :)

I think somebody has said this before, but with his supposed 20 years experience in this I just home he's never called as an expert witness.
 
Last edited:
Just to be clear folks - this thread is pretty much still open for 2 reasons,

1) to continue giving feedback/crit on the original pictures

2) for @Richard C. Jones to be able to come back in and do the decent thing.


Its not for the any pitchfork sharpening, firebrand wielding angry mobs to form... by and large, this has been a remarkably civil thread considering the potential for explosion... lets keep it that way - as I'd hate to have to start handing out warnings to the very people who've been staunch defenders of the OP...

so please...

none of this

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XazOmi4yIbU


ETA: oh, and don't let it start spilling over into other threads either... don't think we haven't already noticed (n)
 
Last edited:
skiking said:
Composites are an artform in themselves and no longer becomes photography.

If I posted an image where I'd spent time composing it (in camera), waiting for the right light or action then someone said I'd put all the parts of an image together via PP, I'd be a little peeved (to say the least). I have nothing against composites and I've seen some good ones (and bad ones) but , like I say, it's a different art form.

This thread could be on danger of becoming a debate on what is to much PP rather than about the fantastic images posted!
Click to expand...

It might as well become a thread discussing something interesting, rather than waiting for someone to apologise for over-reacting who clearly isn't going to!

I think there's a notion that you can 'just' photoshop something, certainly you've alluded to it above by saying it "no longer becomes photography" and it's a phrase I hear a lot from potential clients. In reality that couldn't be further from the truth; to create a composite you need photographs to combine. I work as a commercial car photographer and my entire job now revolves around compositing images and huge amounts of photoshop which is in stark contrast to my time as a Combat Camera Team photographer where we were only allowed to use darkroom techniques. That doesn't mean I do less photography, in fact per image I now do much more. I might have to shoot a landscape, knowing I need to leave room for a car in there somewhere. The sky might be dreadful, so I know I need to go out and shoot a sky that will look good and match my landscape. Then I have to put the car in a studio and light it to match the other two main elements, as well as shooting it with the same perspective in mind.

Then I "just" photoshop it...which can take days trying to tie all the elements together into something realistic. There are lots of reasons to create a composite and they usually revolve around budgets, logistics and time. It's cheaper to hire a studio and shoot on three seperate occasions than it is to take a one-off car costing £500k all the way to somehwere like Scotland and wait for it to stop raining. If anything I require more technical knowledge of both my subject and equipment than I ever did before.

I guess the 'deception' line is another debate entirely, but I don't really agree with that either. If I like a piece of art, then I like it.
 
Circuit Hero said:
Hi mate, thanks for the shout. Probably wont surprise anyone (and I know Im a bit late) but these are clearly genuine - if nothing else the chap who pointed out the winglets on the drop tanks nailed it, but really anyone who has experience shooting in burst or aircraft knows it. To be honest its easier to draw on my experience behind the lens than in the cockpit to analyse these.

The main thing I dont understand is why there's apparently such a negative connotation attached to images being composites? If they were (which again to clarify, theyre not) then what difference does it make? Youre not misleading anyone; youre presenting art, not evidence. Composites take a lot of post production work to pull off accurately and arguably more technical camera work in many cases too.

Just my 2p. Regret spending the best part of 20mins reading this thread from start to finish if Im honest, you owe me 20mins of life Richard! :D

Great shots OP, keep up the good work.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to come and check it out, and sorry about the life lost in doing so, should we ever meet on a TP meet somewhere I'll have to buy you a drink :)
 
TheBigYin said:
Its not for the any pitchfork sharpening, firebrand wielding angry mobs to form... by and large, this has been a remarkably civil thread considering the potential for explosion... lets keep it that way - as I'd hate to have to start handing out warnings to the very people who've been staunch defenders of the OP...
Click to expand...

How about we composite some pitch forks and burning brands onto a peaceful gathering to express support instead :LOL:
 
@Circuit Hero , can you clarify the question about missiles from earlier ie whether the Typhoon in the picture is armed with live missiles or inert practice ones (and if you can tell by the colour or not) ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top