Fw-190D Diving with Allied bombs

[II./JG27_Rich]

A heck of an image

 

[Cybermat47]

I'm speechless :o

[Oesau]

Where was this sourced from?

[DD_bongodriver]

Not actually diving with the bombs by the look of it, seems like it's simply passing under a bomber.

[=RkSq=Hulkbeard]

Not actually diving with the bombs by the look of it, seems like it's simply passing under a bomber.

 

 

That is what it looks like to me too, still, what a photo, amazing.

[AX2]

Where was this sourced from?

?

 

+1 

[Fokkxor]

just looks shoped to me,

 

either blurry plane was added or clear cut bombs where added(probably plane). they dont fit on same image.

[LukeFF]

It's an image that's been around on the web a long time, and you can see the original military reference number at the upper-right hand edge of the shot.

Edited May 31, 2014 by LukeFF

[siipperi]

just looks shoped to me,

 

either blurry plane was added or clear cut bombs where added(probably plane). they dont fit on same image.

Or plane is just moving so fast that long shut down time of the lense (dont know proper word, not photographer) makes is blurry while bombs move relatevily slowly and drop away from camera not past it.

 

People are silly...

[Fokkxor]

sure all possible, but question is what is likely? its more likely that it is shopped then not, changing photographs is a long tradition since we have photos, exactly to produce iconic images you would not be able to photograph likely.

its also possible that the UFO´s on ufo images are real, however the photo that is supposed to show them is likely not. 

 

 

the orig number on image may well be original, its showed the bombs thats it, and just cause its around a long time, we shopped pictures pre 1900´s, so i doubt its longer around then us manipulating pictures.

 

people are easy fooled...

in case someone is interested, photo shopping in USSR;

 

http://englishrussia.com/2012/09/06/photo-manipulations-in-the-ussr/

[DD_bongodriver]

it's not shopped, it's simply an unintentional photo of a 190, the bomber crew is obviously taking images of the bomb fall maybe to track to target and an 190 has simply flow into frame at high speed under the bomber, it's so obvious.

[Cybermat47]

it's not shopped, it's simply an unintentional photo of a 190, the bomber crew is obviously taking images of the bomb fall maybe to track to target and an 190 has simply flow into frame at high speed under the bomber, it's so obvious.

So the Luftwaffe invented the photobomb...

[LukeFF]

it's not shopped, it's simply an unintentional photo of a 190, the bomber crew is obviously taking images of the bomb fall maybe to track to target and an 190 has simply flow into frame at high speed under the bomber, it's so obvious.

 

Exactly, and it's no more of a Photoshop job than this one: 

 

Edited May 31, 2014 by LukeFF

[Cybermat47]

That's quite a dramatic one, where did you find it?

[II./JG27_Rich]

Where was this sourced from?

Found the site again

 

http://www.histomil.com/viewtopic.php?f=345&t=14352&start=60

[AA_Engadin]

Ouchh! That's a close call!

 

I can imagine the german pilot freezed holding breath while instinctively stepping on the brakes at the sight of the bombs.

 

Depending on your POV explosives could have passed the meeting point before him though. 

 

AA_Engadin

[Feathered_IV]

Where was this sourced from?

WW2 definitely.

[MiloMorai]

That photo of the Dora had been around for years. it is one of my books from at least 30 years ago.

[II./JG27_Rich]

That photo of the Dora had been around for years. it is one of my books from at least 30 years ago.

That will silence the photoshop doubters

[Fokkxor]

guys you are a funny lot, you act like i want to take away your little baby jesus, no worry you can keep him, i basically said only, looks shopped "TO ME", i never ruled out that the picture may be 100% legit

and no, other, different photos do not legitimize a shopped photo, not sure what you where thinking there.

also if its in a book 40 years old....what does this say? nothing! books as newspapers are full with manipulated images throughout history.

 

anyways, you guys like to believe so badly that you start mocking me or referring to me personally in a 3rd person type in a mocking way. also you make up reasons to reassure yourself how legit that picture is, not sure if you doubt it more than i do.

 

whatever, i am not attacking your baby jesus anymore, leave me in peace, have fun with the pic, i am out of this thread. 

[MiloMorai]

So Fokkxor you believe the moon landings are faked?

[J2_Trupobaw]

That will silence the photoshop doubters

Nothing will silence photoshop doubters  . (And yes, a heck of image. Thanks for sharing it).

 

 

http://xkcd.com/331/

Edited June 1, 2014 by Trupobaw

[Bladderburst]

guys you are a funny lot, you act like i want to take away your little baby jesus, no worry you can keep him, i basically said only, looks shopped "TO ME", i never ruled out that the picture may be 100% legit

and no, other, different photos do not legitimize a shopped photo, not sure what you where thinking there.

also if its in a book 40 years old....what does this say? nothing! books as newspapers are full with manipulated images throughout history.

 

anyways, you guys like to believe so badly that you start mocking me or referring to me personally in a 3rd person type in a mocking way. also you make up reasons to reassure yourself how legit that picture is, not sure if you doubt it more than i do.

 

whatever, i am not attacking your baby jesus anymore, leave me in peace, have fun with the pic, i am out of this thread. 

 

Well, you're the funny one here calling photoshop for no real reason on a VERY CLASSIC PHOTO seen in VERY OLD BOOKS and then looking down upon anyone telling you it's not the case. That photo was an accidental shot of a 190D from an allied bomber, I've seen it several time in several books that came out before photoshop even existed.

 

Keep baby Jesus out of this, this has nothing to do with religion or zealots.

 

Seriously what a bad attitude. 

[Rjel]

Funny how the doubter wants others to prove it's legit. I'd think the weight of proving it fakes falls squarely on the doubter.

[DD_bongodriver]

why would anyone need to fake a photo that depicts a probably common event during that period? it's not a 190 diving with bombs, it doesn't even look like it's diving, it's just a 190 passing under an allied bomber with some bombs falling below it, the whole concept would be like photo shopping Hitlers moustache on Hitler.

[MiloMorai]

Funny how the doubter wants others to prove it's legit. I'd think the weight of proving it fakes falls squarely on the doubter.

 

This is not the only subject where this happens.

[Bearcat]

guys you are a funny lot, you act like i want to take away your little baby jesus, no worry you can keep him, i basically said only, looks shopped "TO ME", i never ruled out that the picture may be 100% legit

and no, other, different photos do not legitimize a shopped photo, not sure what you where thinking there.

also if its in a book 40 years old....what does this say? nothing! books as newspapers are full with manipulated images throughout history.

 

anyways, you guys like to believe so badly that you start mocking me or referring to me personally in a 3rd person type in a mocking way. also you make up reasons to reassure yourself how legit that picture is, not sure if you doubt it more than i do.

 

whatever, i am not attacking your baby jesus anymore, leave me in peace, have fun with the pic, i am out of this thread. 

 

Lets just keep baby Jesus out of the discussion shall we..

[Cybermat47]

Lets just keep baby Jesus out of the discussion shall we..

Damn, I was just about to make a massive post about how I played baby Jesus when I was a few months old

 

 

[BraveSirRobin]

 

 

 

This image looks photoshopped.