Identify this video, please...

Kyle Boatwright said...
I completely disagree. Even the best CG stuff is pretty obvious if you
know what you're looking at. The stuff in The Aviator, Independance Day,
etc. is obviously fake. This footage is the real thing.

KB

On the other hand, the fact that the props are all in sync (e.g. all the
Spit's prop's are rotating at the same speed and have the same
orientation,
same thing for the Mossies) can't be real...

KB


Heh, that was my reaction too. Same with everyone I've shown it to. If you
don't suspect that it's CG, it could get past you easily. Especially the
first few scenes in the mosquito video. But after those opening shots, there
are enough things just *slightly* off that it gives it away, like the light
that Brian mentioned, the dust kicked up at landing, or what looks (to me,
at least) like a regularly repeated grass texture.

Other than that, these items in the menu on his website lend suspicion...
Airplanes CGI
Lightwave

Pretty amazing stuff!

-Tony Goetz

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:zoAyf.490497$084.186710@attbi_s22...
The clearest example is towards the end of the video. Look at the
light on the tail of the plane as it lands. Pause the video. It's
obviously not a real light.

Even the terrain looks CGI to me.

By GOD, that's amazing. I can't believe that's not real.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


Yes, it does look very good. Mega kudos to the author. Thanks for posting, Jay.

Another clue is when the Mosquito is setting up to land, it looks like it has full flaps in before the gear is lowered -
I'm sure that is backwards but could be wrong...

Some things that haven't been mentioned...
If it were real, which the CGI pros in the group say it's not,
where in the world would there be 4 Mosquito's?
and 4 Spitfires?
painted similarly? (but wrongly according to SPM)
in recent history?
doing low passes with nobody watching?
You'd imagine that with all that famous rag and aluminum flying around, that
at least one car or person would show up. I know I would! Man what a site!

Also.. no typical prop wash "track" down the center of that impeccable
turf. And either the wind blows the dust in the wrong direction or the
pilot landing Mosquito lands on the downwind wheel first.

Somebody already mentioned the prop sync... even the Spitfires props are
synched.

Anybody know about the gear system? Would both mains lower at the identical
rate?

Awesome video non the less!

Thanks

Jim


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photoga...6-merlins.mpeg

Can anyone give me some information on this remarkable video? It's
wonderfully clear footage of Merlin-powered Spitfires and Mosquitos,
but it looks too new to be original World War II footage.

It almost looks like Hollywood-quality stuff, but the guy who sent it
in didn't know its origin.

Thanks!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

By GOD, that's amazing. I can't believe that's not real.
Jay Honeck

NOT something you want to hear from your sig other.

Thanks for the laugh.
Jim

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I did a quick
check on the squadron codes. HE was used by 263 Squadron, which didn't fly
Mosquitoes, and JE was used by 195 Squadron, which didn't fly Spitfires. Go
figure.

That rings a bell. There was a movie that used those codes on the Mossies. I did
not see the films and remember it (or possibly mis-remember it) only from
discussion in print about the misuse of the "HE" prefix. I've checked "RAF
Bomber Command in Fact, Film, and Fiction" and don't see a reference to it, however.

It's not one of the "633 Squadron" films - they used an "HT" prefix and stuck
fake nose guns on their Mossies.

FWIW, the British film industry started using color for war films about 1964.

Also. Neither 263 squadron nor 195 squadron were actually portrayed in film.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

When I saw it, I was impressed by it's CLARITY. Also, the sound was
obviously NOT from a distance of a ground observer (although the sound
WAS terrific). Intuitively, it was "too good to be true". It has
"Hollywood" written all over it. After others stated it was "CGI"
(just what does that stand for?), it clicked in my head, yeah, somehow
a studio creation. It shows how good they are getting, though. Even
though I thought it was somehow to clear and good to be true, I did not
know that this COULD be faked. Amazing!!

Somebody already mentioned the prop sync... even the Spitfires props are
synched.

See, now *I* explained that phenomenon away as a function of the movie
camera.

Funny -- we see what we believe should be there.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

CGI computer generated image.

Somebody already mentioned the prop sync... even the Spitfires props are
synched. Anybody know about the gear system? Would both mains lower at
the identical
rate?

The same thought struck me too, the props being in synch seemed odd. As
far as the gear on the Mosquito, it seemed to come down a bit fast and
a little too evenly IMO. Still, if it is CGI it was an amazing (and
fun) piece to watch!

Wooly

Gear does not come down that smoothly (although the video of it doing
it was wayyy cooool). Gear comes down in fits and starts, and not so
closely synchronized. Good point about the props being in exact synch
too.