Air Force One at Daytona

Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

Of course I know nothing about photography, So I could be way off

"Dan Moos" wrote in

Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

What looks out of place, Dan?

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Dan Moos" wrote in

Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in
the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

What looks out of place, Dan?



The main gear looks like it's kinda "melded" into the stands for lack of a
better word.

As for the light standard, well, I guess I don't know the effects of a
telephoto lens, but to my layman's eyes it appears to be in the path of the
wing. Can the right lense really do this? Especially since the standes and
the plane seem to be equally in focus.

Dan Moos wrote:

Can the right lense really do this?

This is called "flattened depth of field" and it makes everything seem to be
about the same distance from the camera. Telephoto lenses are famous for this.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

"Dan Moos" wrote in message
...

The main gear looks like it's kinda "melded" into the stands for lack of a
better word.

As for the light standard, well, I guess I don't know the effects of a
telephoto lens, but to my layman's eyes it appears to be in the path of
the
wing. Can the right lense really do this? Especially since the standes and
the plane seem to be equally in focus.



I think it is just the foreshortening effect. Everything is in focus
because telephoto lenses do this with items that are both far from the lense
but at somewhat different distances. Everything gets compressed into
approximately the same depth of field, so the light stanchion looks like it
is about to get sucked into #4. The main gear appears to blend with the
stands because the elements of each are about the same color values. Its
clearly a takeoff picture. Looks like an appropriate flap extension, deck
angle looks about right, and the gear is clearly in transit, as indicated by
the open gear doors.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Dan Moos" wrote in message
...

The main gear looks like it's kinda "melded" into the stands for lack of
a
better word.

As for the light standard, well, I guess I don't know the effects of a
telephoto lens, but to my layman's eyes it appears to be in the path of
the
wing. Can the right lense really do this? Especially since the standes
and
the plane seem to be equally in focus.



I think it is just the foreshortening effect. Everything is in focus
because telephoto lenses do this with items that are both far from the
lense
but at somewhat different distances. Everything gets compressed into
approximately the same depth of field, so the light stanchion looks like
it
is about to get sucked into #4. The main gear appears to blend with the
stands because the elements of each are about the same color values. Its
clearly a takeoff picture. Looks like an appropriate flap extension, deck
angle looks about right, and the gear is clearly in transit, as indicated
by
the open gear doors.

Good enough for me. It is certainly configured properly for takeoff, I just
didn't know that the proper lense would do that. I just learned something
new!

Thanks fellas

So what is that big metal stripe on the belly ? Its like a big metalic
smile. Is that decoration ? or more ?


Stuart


"Dan Moos" wrote in message
...

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Dan Moos" wrote in

Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in
the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

What looks out of place, Dan?



The main gear looks like it's kinda "melded" into the stands for lack of a
better word.

As for the light standard, well, I guess I don't know the effects of a
telephoto lens, but to my layman's eyes it appears to be in the path of
the
wing. Can the right lense really do this? Especially since the standes and
the plane seem to be equally in focus.

Dan Moos wrote:

Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

Of course I know nothing about photography, So I could be way off

The runway is behind the stands from this viewpoint.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

"Dan Moos" wrote in message
...
Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

Of course I know nothing about photography, So I could be way off


It's real. I saw it happen in real time, as I was watching the race. They
didn't show the flyby that others said happened.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.580 / Virus Database: 367 - Release Date: 2/7/04

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Dan Moos" wrote in message
...
Is it possibly a doctored photo? Look at one of the light standards in
the
stands, and the main gear. Looks a little fishy to me.

Of course I know nothing about photography, So I could be way off


It's real. I saw it happen in real time, as I was watching the race. They
didn't show the flyby that others said happened.
--
Jim in NC


Actually they did...during the pre-race show...

Jay Beckman
Chandler, AZ
Student Pilot
..9 Hours ... Nowhere to go but up!