What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
56 Comments
- DaveNASA, on 10/12/2007, -2/+144It was taken by another plane lol. Not a satellite (whoever thought that up is dumb). The pilot who took this photo is on the forums of NASASpaceflight.com which is where this photo will have been taken from.
- Sharkee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+109Yeah, there's no way a satellite could "lock on" to a plane. That is unless they had the Goldeneye...
- stisaac, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49And if a satellite did this, the plane wouldn't be any bigger in the air than the stuff on the ground.
- M0b1u5, on 10/12/2007, -10/+51Lame. Inaccurate. Dumb.
Buried. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+39It's not 100% inaccurate... I mean, he at least pointed out that it is in fact a "photo". Everything else is wrong though. :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+37This picture really wasn't that "awesome."
- miles01110, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13"whoever thought that up is dumb"
I think it was Dan Harlow. - TroubleInMind, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Too close for missiles, switching to guns...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This is how this photo would look if it was retouched:
http://www.unlimitedimagehosting.com/images/38625070.jpg - markp93, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Cool... you can just make out Louis Gossett, Jr. in the cockpit.
- sabbac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4YAY! Auto levels! It solves so many issues.
- gaoshan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Even nicer attempt, but "Iron Eagle" featured the F-16A(Block 4. The Block 4 that sported an all chrome, vibrating control stick and anti-lock flaps) while "Iron Eagle II" rather obviously featured the F-16B(Block 10, with optional export-only avionics package and all leather interior) versions of the fighting falcon, not simply the "F-16 Fighting Falcon".
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Getting wordpress errors already. Mirror: http://www.glowfoto.com/static_image/25-190105L/7981/jpg/02/2007/img3/glowfoto
- RoyHobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I think the Birds Eye II picture is the best of those, but this is spam as he linked directly to his site.
- LoveWidescreen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice attempt, but "Iron Eagle" and "Iron Eagle II" featured the F-16 Fighting Falcon, not the F-15 Eagle/Strike Eagle.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7congratulations.... we all know how to use photoshop
- Crass22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Aparently this same orbiting satelite can take photographs below the clouds! http://danharlow.com/gallery/2007/02/24/birds-eye-view-ii/
- jmurrayufo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yeah, i agree there. I want to see a sat. that can take that much detail of a plane moving that fast!
- jbeardsl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Buried as inaccurate
- Brajeshwar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm sorry but not thinking over the title when I copied that. However, I thought the photograph whoever took it it awesome and nicely shot.
- rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How about "inaccurate"?
- AnotherCanadian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah, i figured that when i saw that is was a wide angle shot. if it was a satellite shot, it would be top down, with a very narrow FOV.
- ryanjulian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe I don't find it quite as amazing knowing that the shuttles sit there for at least a couple weeks before launch (and sometimes a month or more). "During a shuttle mission" is misleading.
It's still a cool picture. - undersky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2HOW DUMB, when I saw this picture I immediately questioned the satellite claim because the freaking fighter jet is so much bigger than the shuttle....that's only possible if the distance between the camera and the jet is MUCH smaller than the distance between the camera and the shuttle. If it's satellite, those two distances will be almost equal, thus making their relative sizes on the picture proportional to their actual size, thus the jet should look FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR more smaller.
anyone with elementary physics knowledge after studying the optic part would know this. - nicociri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1nice shot indeed. Dugg just because i liked it..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2We were inverted...
- Crass22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1o rly?
- D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone else wondering why that plane was so close to a shuttle seemingly ready to launch?
I'm calling Photoshop on this one.... - glenp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Isn't a simpler explanation the pictures were taken by the F15's wingman? They typically fly in pairs and I expect the pilots may have seen this as a photo opportunity.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I was about to say that satellite had some serious quality lol
- habitat2050, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The total cost of taking this photo if the description is true has to be around 5 Billion dollars; and that has to be some sort of record.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I thought he took the picture until I read his "About" page:
"This is a photo gallery of my own photpgraphs as well as >>images I have collected from that internet - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It's "America, **** yeah, coming AGAIN to save the mother ******* day yeah"
- QuantumParadox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I don't care what anyone says, this is a beautiful picture regardless if it's a photoshop or not. Hopefully this up coming mission will go smoothly and that no astronaut will come back wanting to kill someone. I am a engineering student at Florida Tech and my goal is to work for NASA. I'm a Trekkie!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Because they use telephoto lens which makes it appear closer. Jets don't usually fly that close.
- wcarolyn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1How did you do that? I tried using levels (for white balance as well) and shadows/highlights but I can't get the same results as yours.
- darrenwhitley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The original was too blue and your version is oversaturated and a bit too yellow as well.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3if it was "true", then it would look a whole lot better
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0wcarolyn: Nothing it was just auto levels and some DRI tutorial I found on good-tutorials.com.
I'm just showing that it could be a good photo if somebody spent the time retouching it. Who cares about how I retouched it, it's just Photoshop. - benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -10/+9even if the description is 100% inaccurate, its still a pretty cool photo
- OneLess, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Why does this crap have 700 diggs? What a disgrace...In America we label our goddamn photos right!
- buss, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5We have to protect science and the pursuit of knowledge with the military...this is so depressing.
- Akronos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Photoshop?
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -10/+8WE GOT SATELLITE LOCK-ON!!! EJECT EJECT!
Stupid assed ***** digg descriptions FTL. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Should I bury this as "Spam" or "OK, this is lame"?
- xchino, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1better than some jihad nut running his crop duster into the shuttle filled with our best and brightest.
- beelz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4yea and your telling me they don't have satellites that can look in my window. bah
- wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Associated tags:
America, ***** Yeah!, Coming to save, the mother *****' day YEAH! - SwissCamel, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5These are all toys. My son took the photo.
- blynder, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3I don't believe it for a second!
-
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 