Real or animated

[ssim]

I know that there are several RC Airplane fans here. I picked this up off of another forum board where the opinions are pretty well split on whether this is real or a computer animation. If it is real, a pretty slick job of running the controls.

http://www.midcountyrc.com/videocorner/AFPD.wmv (http://www.midcountyrc.com/videocorner/AFPD.wmv)

[rebel61021]

I would have to say it is a computer animation I have seen lots of RC planes and have never seen anyone be able to hover a plane like in that video.

[ssim]

Here is a second link from the same thread. I'm pretty convinced that this one is not animated and he seems to be able to get this thing to hover.

www.fan-tasticmodels.com/muller.wmv (http://www.fan-tasticmodels.com/muller.wmv)

[Scottes]

Though the stunts seem possible enough I have a hard time believing the smoke, particularly the dissipation of the smoke. Sometimes it lingers, sometimes fades very quickly. In particular about 29-31 seconds in when it flies by right to left.

However, smoke is fairly difficult to render, and that would seem to be an awful lot of work to go through - why not just make the stunts themselves?

In the end, I'd vote real, guessing that the smoke is just how it is.

[Twist]

Blowing up the first video full screen it looks very fake. Also the smoke trails are so uniform to a degree. Smoke, rain and fire are actually all really easy to render these days. It was very difficult many years ago when lightwave and 3D studio max first came out. Now there are whole plugins designed to automate this stuff. I think the second one is real but I have a feeling that is an all stryo plane making it so light the props power could easily keep it up.

Just my thoughts.

[kb244]

If you wait around to the second half of the first video, it becomes extremely apparent that it's rendered. For the first half, lighting, colors, shadows, texture can tell.

[Belmondo]

I would also vote for real. I've seen all those things done before, but never quite that rapidly, nor so beautifully choreographed. On the other hand, I've never seen real world-class competitors fly before. The hovering is now done pretty routinely. The power to weight ratio in these planes is such that they can stand them on their tail and just hang on the prop. These are larger models, and they swing a very large propeller.

[Tom W]

I don't know what it is, but I like that third "blues" tune a lot!

[Citizensmith]

Absolutely fake.
1) Nobody is that good with a video camera. Put your cursor the airplane and take your hand off the mouse. The plane stays centered. So either the videographer was precognizant and knew exactly where each twist and tur of the plane would take it or its a computer rendering.
2) It just looks like a rendering. The lighting doesn't match the ambient lighting (very obvious for the close up views) and the smoke just looks kind of crappy at times. I've seen better smoke effects in some video games. :)

Nice work, but definitely rendered.

[Citizensmith]

The hovering is now done pretty routinely. The power to weight ratio in these planes is such that they can stand them on their tail and just hang on the prop. These are larger models, and they swing a very large propeller.

But when doing that the plane will start to rotate. There is a reason helicopters have that rear rotor. Sure the wings will help, but they aren't enough to stop the plane spinning if you try a move like that.

Having watched it again that plane is a little too gravity defying. Have they heard of the concept of stall speed?

[Belmondo]

But when doing that the plane will start to rotate. There is a reason helicopters have that rear rotor. Sure the wings will help, but they aren't enough to stop the plane spinning if you try a move like that.

Yes and no. If the airplane's controls are absolutely neutral, eventually engine torque will cause it to start rotating. If you notice in the closeups, though, the ailerons are fully deployed, so prop wash over the wings would offset the torque. Although I've never seen anybody as nearly skilled as this guy purports to be, I have seen demonstration of R/C flying where the plane literally hovers like a helicopter for as long as the pilot cares to keep it in that attitude (or until he has a brain fart).

[Moppie]

I agree with everybody :D

Iv also seen R/C planes perform similar stunts, the power to weight ratio is huge, 100 times out of scale with a real plane.
Even a simple search of google for RC plane videos will get you links to several videos all showing similar stunts, including lots of hovering etc.

But, there is also something unnaturral about how its filmed, and I think Citizensmith nailed it.
The camera control is to perfect. Far, far to perfect, and upclose the planes colours don't quite seem to be real.
I wonder if what we are seeing is a combination of digital editing, and real footage.
Prehaps lots of footage of a real plane, actualy performing the stunts has been digitized with just the plane isolated from the back ground.
Then someone has either hand shot the whole sequence, or used a robotic arm, and the footage of the plane has then been edited in to fit the sound track (which was awsome) and camera movement.
edit: Infact after watching several more videos, the camer movement is simply to perfect, and notice the camera never zooms, the plane always comes to the camera, not vice-versa.
I think real plane footage, edited and digital enhanced, to fit preshot sequence filmed with motorised (robotic) camera mount.

Also note, twice the camer is unable to track high enough to capture the planes movement, and twice it appears to lose focus as the plane comes back into frame.

[pradeep1]

It's digital for all the reasons mentioned above. Finally, the scene where the plane hovers and goes up and you get a shot of the sun in the frame, the side of the plane facing the camera is not darkened out. I don't know of any real camera that has that type of exposure latitude where you can see the sun properly exposed in the background and full detail in the foreground....see the video again. This happens around 2:59 minutes.

[PacAce]

I say it's CGA, no question about it! It's just missing the "physics" that's very evident in the 2nd video which is without a doubt real.

[Citizensmith]

Yes and no. If the airplane's controls are absolutely neutral, eventually engine torque will cause it to start rotating. If you notice in the closeups, though, the ailerons are fully deployed, so prop wash over the wings would offset the torque. Although I've never seen anybody as nearly skilled as this guy purports to be, I have seen demonstration of R/C flying where the plane literally hovers like a helicopter for as long as the pilot cares to keep it in that attitude (or until he has a brain fart).


I see what you mean from the second (real) video. When he hovers there is a lot less rotation than I'd expect. It is definitely rotating, but not much.

[PacAce]

BTW, did anybody notice the very unrealistic shadow that the plane is casting on the ground? That alone tells you that it's a computer generated animation. In real life, the sun is too far away to make the shadow size vary the way it is doing in the video as the plane gets closer and then farther away from the ground. :confused:

[DocFrankenstein]

Uhh... How about the fact that THERE'S NO PILOT IN THE PLANE!

:lol::lol::lol:

This is sooo fake, I can't beleive you're even thinking about it.

The plane speed is just too slow... but it's kinda funny though.

[Citizensmith]

Uhh... How about the fact that THERE'S NO PILOT IN THE PLANE!

:lol::lol::lol:

This is sooo fake, I can't beleive you're even thinking about it.

The plane speed is just too slow... but it's kinda funny though.

But I liked the guy in the background, arguing with someone about how much profit he was making from selling a couple of horses.

[ssim]

How about the fact that THERE'S NO PILOT IN THE PLANE

This is similar to another thread about the motorman on the train. They're in there you just can't see them.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[PacAce]

The plane speed is just too slow... but it's kinda funny though.
Have you seen the 2nd video? That's real, I'm sure. Look how slowly that planes flying around! :shock:

[PacAce]

Uhh... How about the fact that THERE'S NO PILOT IN THE PLANE!

:lol::lol::lol:

Ummm, how about the fact that we're talking about a remote controlled plane unless there are 2 inch people who like to go for joy rides in model airplanes. :mrgreen:

[rohitkumar]

i think its animated, plane drops a crisp shadow but the dense snokw does not cast any shadow at any point of time, also when the plane is hovering very near to the camera you can see reflections of the surroundings on the blades but not a single faint reflection of the camera gear

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

CGA
Smoke trail dissipation is uniform despite density differences, like I would expect in a rendered, timed, program.

I've got to give credit for the animation work though, smooooth in most places.

Shadows are very sharp, yet the detail did not blank out when passing the sun.

Camera just tooo perfect.

Neat job though. This was fun to watch.

[am_pitbull_terrier]

The second one is definitely real. The first, I don't think so.