Proof of Photomanipulation

Mobertermy said:
Does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

I think your viewpoint is too far north. The angle between the right hand edge of the light pole and the right hand edge of the power box should be about the same as the angle between the light pole and the left hand support of the overhead sign. From your sight line, the latter angle is too big. If you get the right sight line, it looks like the light poles either end of the far side of the bridge will be just out of shot on either side of the picture.

Dave

ETA: The distance may be out too, but there aren't enough clear distant reference points to say for certain.
 
Last edited:
Mobertermy said:
[qimg]http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8695/lloydandcabcloseup2.jpg[/qimg]

Traffic arm on the left is TA3, and on the right is TA2.
Man in white shirt is to right of TA3. Man in Blue shirt is to right of man in white shirt. Cab to right of man in blue shirt.

Pole and power box to right of overhead sign. Line of sight with pole and power box circled in green:
[qimg]http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8568/trafficarmslos1.png[/qimg]

Does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

I do. The traffic arm on the left is TA4, the one on the right is TA3 and TA2 is well out of shot to the right. Your line of sight is wrong.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
I do. The traffic arm on the left is TA4, the one on the right is TA3 and TA2 is well out of shot to the right. Your line of sight is wrong.
Click to expand...

I do believe you're right. In that case, one of the light poles on either end of the bridge (I assume Mobertermy's point is that he can't see them, therefore photomanipulation) is out of shot to the right, and the other is directly behind one of the uprights of the overhead sign. I'll have a closer look.

Dave

ETA: tried, but still not sure. There aren't enough reference points in this photo to get a confident line of sight without careful measurements. This looks plausible:



...which would place both light poles out of shot to the right, and one very distant one behind the overhead sign uprights. But I wouldn't stake an accusation of treason on it.

Dave
 
Last edited:
and you should use the correct date of the google earth image as the cloverleaf has changed quite a lot since 911. The April 1999 one is very clear and should suffice.

It's likely the photo was taken from somewhere on the shoulder of the SW loop of the junction
 
Last edited:
Camera is definitely too far north, at that angle you wouldn't see that much of the pentagon itself.
 
Mobertermy said:
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8695/lloydandcabcloseup2.jpg

Traffic arm on the left is TA3, and on the right is TA2.
Man in white shirt is to right of TA3. Man in Blue shirt is to right of man in white shirt. Cab to right of man in blue shirt.

Pole and power box to right of overhead sign. Line of sight with pole and power box circled in green:
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8568/trafficarmslos1.png

Does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...
yes i disagree, align the exit sign with the overhead sign support post, this is what you get, all your traffic gates are off by one. your camera location is WAY off. I don't know if you are doing this deliberately to save your project from the dust bin or what. You really should know better.

exitsigntosignpole-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Mobertermy said:
[qimg]http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8695/lloydandcabcloseup2.jpg[/qimg]

Traffic arm on the left is TA3, and on the right is TA2.
Man in white shirt is to right of TA3. Man in Blue shirt is to right of man in white shirt. Cab to right of man in blue shirt.

Pole and power box to right of overhead sign. Line of sight with pole and power box circled in green:
[qimg]http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8568/trafficarmslos1.png[/qimg]

Does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

Yes. Look at the satellite view of the power box, pole and the overhead sign. You can see that the distance between the pole and the sign supports is roughly 3x to 4x the distance between the sign supports. Yet in the picture above it those distances are almost identical.
This can only mean that parallax has shortened the distance, so the picture was taken from a point further South.

Then, as others have correctly pointed out, due to the telephoto foreshortening the depth perception is completely distorted. (everything looks much flatter than it actually is) The traffic arm you can just see on the right cannot be TA2, as it is in fact perpendicular to the sign poles, and almost directly beneath the sign. I could not be in the field of view, based on the observed parallax. So it is TA3, as others have stated.

I've made an image to demonstrate just how distorted the pole distances are in the picture you've selected. I guess in a sense you're correct: the photos are misleading - but it is the artifact of photography, nothing more.

Poleandsign.jpg
 
Last edited:
Mobertermy said:
[qimg]http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8695/lloydandcabcloseup2.jpg[/qimg]

Traffic arm on the left is TA3, and on the right is TA2.
Man in white shirt is to right of TA3. Man in Blue shirt is to right of man in white shirt. Cab to right of man in blue shirt.

Pole and power box to right of overhead sign. Line of sight with pole and power box circled in green:
[qimg]http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8568/trafficarmslos1.png[/qimg]

Does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

Yes. Traffic arm on the left is TA4, and on the right is TA3.

Point of view must be about 100 feet further south, and from there probably farther away.
Your line of sight does not look at the burning scene at the Pentagon.

Try to locate the green "Exit" sign that you see between the two support poles of the overhead sign!
 
I've got the camera close in here, but it could be anywhere along that line. I've not got enough stuff in the background to triangulate. Every new photo give me an opportunity to refine my scene, I moved the white car a little to the east :) .

With your plot you only get the south wall of the pentagon not the crash site, and TA3 is to the left of the picture not the right. You also get a bunch of light poles from the background that aren't in the photo.
 

Attachments

  • Pent6.jpg
    Pent6.jpg
    82 KB · Views: 20
drewid said:
I've got the camera close in here, but it could be anywhere along that line. I've not got enough stuff in the background to triangulate. Every new photo give me an opportunity to refine my scene, I moved the white car a little to the east :) .

With your plot you only get the south wall of the pentagon not the crash site, and TA3 is to the left of the picture not the right. You also get a bunch of light poles from the background that aren't in the photo.
Click to expand...
Did I not say he doesn't understand what a "line of sight" is?


:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
So why can't we see pole B where it should be in photos 5-8?
Click to expand...

It is where it should be. It's where you've ( correctly ) labelled it to be, which is at the north end of the bridge parapet.



 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom