Brisbane’s 10/11

User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3772
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1313 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Brisbane’s 10/11

Unread post by rachel »

Linking to the Fakeologist article which this post relates to:
http://fakeologist.com/blog/2018/10/15/brisbanes-10-11/

I mentioned on the audiochat I had looked at the video frame-by-frame and it was my opinion it was a mix of real and fake edited together. So, from the footage and looking at what RAAF planes are in service, the plane appears to be a Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Boeing C-17A Globemaster III.

Examples:
c17a-1.jpg
c17a-1.jpg (22.88 KiB) Viewed 1411 times
c17a-2.jpg
c17a-2.jpg (23.2 KiB) Viewed 1411 times
c17a-3.jpg
c17a-3.jpg (21.85 KiB) Viewed 1411 times

The point of these pictures, to get the idea of the amount of detail on the plane it is possible to spot on a cloudless day in strong sunlight. We can then compare this to what was actually filmed from the claimed office window.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3772
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1313 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Brisbane’s 10/11

Unread post by rachel »

The weather in Brisbane looks somewhat more overcast than the previous pictures, so we would expect the difference between the light and dark of the top and bottom of the plane to be less pronounces, not more so. What do we actually see:

plane-still1a.jpg
plane-still1a.jpg (56.37 KiB) Viewed 1410 times
plane-still1b.jpg
plane-still1b.jpg (57.98 KiB) Viewed 1410 times
plane-still1c.jpg
plane-still1c.jpg (38.6 KiB) Viewed 1410 times

I would say the light and dark are more pronounced, and there is a distinct lack of detail in the plane compared to the previous photos. Where are the pilot's windows? The undercarriage is featureless black, reminiscent of the 9/11 planes in fact. I would put it down to the fact the plane has been added via CGI, and its 3D rendering is set to a basic level.

Also, if we look at the last still, the rendering of the room is equally low in detail. How exactly does the window attach to that wall? Do any office blocks seriously have net curtains? More likely, the interior and the window refection is equally fake, added in the 3D software to frame the shot and give it context. The curtain shape being used to mask an area so no internal objects have to be created.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3772
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1313 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Brisbane’s 10/11

Unread post by rachel »

And here are a couple of examples of 3D Boeing C-17 Globemaster planes that can be downloaded and used in computer animation software.
https://hum3d.com/3d-models/boeing-c-17 ... aster-iii/

Free:
cgi-c17a-1.jpg
cgi-c17a-1.jpg (16.03 KiB) Viewed 1410 times
Paid:
cgi-c17a-2.jpg
cgi-c17a-2.jpg (13.9 KiB) Viewed 1410 times
cgi-c17a-3.jpg
cgi-c17a-3.jpg (25.32 KiB) Viewed 1410 times
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3772
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1313 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Brisbane’s 10/11

Unread post by rachel »

At the end of the first plane clip, the camera moves from pointing out of the right side of the window to back down the river. As the camera stops panning the left wall swings back. It is only the last twelve frames and is easily missed in real time. This does not demonstrate what we'd expect from true perspective and again points to the room being a 3D model overlaid on the video.

The dotted line demonstrates the camera does not move, instead the wall morphs and is pulled back to reveal more of the underlying scene.
The dotted line demonstrates the camera does not move, instead the wall morphs and is pulled back to reveal more of the underlying scene.
frame-morph.jpg (46.74 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3772
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1313 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Brisbane’s 10/11

Unread post by rachel »

I'll take a look quick at the third clip of the Boeing C-17A Globemaster III, this is the side view, which I again suspect of being faked. My theory, either it is another CGI plane, or maybe a real plane, but masked from its original background and introduced into this scene, larger and lower than actuality. This is my opinion, as the scaling and lack of plane reflections on buildings, together with the fortuity of another eye level fly pass, just looks wrong.

I start with a still from the first clip, looking at the plane as it travels towards us, it just above the dotted line, in the middle of the river. The view point of the third clip is somewhere around the building with the red dot, maybe a bit further away. We can see the red buildings on the nearer left river bank in both shots. The dotted line roughly estimates where we are looking in the first side view.

plane-front.jpg
plane-front.jpg (46.93 KiB) Viewed 1403 times
plane-side1.jpg
plane-side1.jpg (82.31 KiB) Viewed 1403 times

From both views we can see boats on the river and the relative plane size and height compared to them. The plane is higher in the first shot and the scaling looks different between the two. A Boeing C-17A is 174 feet in length, a little over three London buses. From the second side shot it appears the plane is wider than the white building. I've added the buses based on plane's length, but in reality they would be a bigger because the building is nearer to the viewer than the plane about to pass behind it. In all, the scaling looks wrong.

plane-side2.jpg
plane-side2.jpg (119.92 KiB) Viewed 1403 times
Post Reply