Drone Research Team

Drones Research Team - Research => Drones dimensions and location measurements => : elevenaugust July 29, 2008, 12:10:58 AM

: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: elevenaugust July 29, 2008, 12:10:58 AM
While waiting for HPO's model to be finished ;), I propose you to:


The problem is how to test it with the same pole configuration?
Maybe you will need to create a pole model? ;D
Any idea about his height?

The main problem, as we all know it, is this:
(http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/5341/shadows1go6.jpg)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Nemo492 July 29, 2008, 12:20:51 AM
IF there is a wrong shadow, then IMO
one would have to explain how the rendering software
could have been wrong..
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: BigFnTuna July 29, 2008, 12:31:41 AM
It seems to me that the angle Torvald has the drone at is wrong...  The work is great, but he has the drone tilting backwards instead of somewhat forward.  Or is he correct with that angle?

Tuna
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Nemo492 July 29, 2008, 12:59:51 AM
It seems to me that the angle Torvald has the drone at is wrong...

Do you mean a biased perspective ?
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 29, 2008, 01:11:05 AM
I find nothing wrong with the shadows.  Renderers are meant to simulate reality not the other way around.  The surface beneath the Drone can affect both the shadows and the lighting and that is staying clear of any strange effect the Drone itself may produce such as the cloaking and optical properties of any field generated.  this other forum sets up rules that reality is supposed to follow and do not realize that reality cares not two cents for their rules.  It is an arrogance for any to say that they set up rules that all must follow and then when nature and reality ignores them, to declare all a waste and all a fake.  It is only the expression of a bias and nothing else.  In the other forums analysis the shadows are chosen and others ignored the points made are edited to fit.  light can be reflected or blocked by many things that will alter the apparent sources over a short range.  In location filming this is done all the time and sometimes corrections have to be made to make the shadows appear to be coming from the same source.  The special properties that the Drone may have are always ignored as if it is against the rules to even mention them and yet one of their own has called for all special properties of the Drone to be listed and compared with ALL OTHER UFO CASES.  This is clearly not a proposal that comes from one who knows anything about the number of UFO cases there are.  Any one can go and cause lighting and shadows to change by placing common things in a scene to block or reflect light. It happens all the time in the REAL WORLD.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 29, 2008, 01:27:07 AM
I agree, the hood of a white car beside the photographer could reflect light back up under the drone at this height above the pole. We cannot know what was reflecting the light or not as we do not know what was around the photographer when the image was shot. I used to be a photographer back in my highschool days and we used portable reflectors all the time for fill and reflection. Why they can't take this into account is obvious though.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 29, 2008, 01:35:18 AM
Why they can't take this into account is obvious though
You are 100% correct Endzone, but you and I, by experience there with their "experts", know why.  This other group will never take any positive evidence into account and the evidence of this is their very forum and all 23,000 or so posts on this unimportant subject.  There is nothing wrong with the shadows and nothing wrong with the Drone size or any of the rest and I have said over and over that it could be CG, but if so it is a CG job that no one there could do or appreciate and then just maybe it is REAL.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: 10538 July 29, 2008, 01:36:09 AM
I find nothing wrong with the shadows.

Me neither.  This is the main reason why I can't put this down.  The shadows don't lie.  They are very hard for a hoaxer to get just right.  Usually they will diffuse the shadows or simply make the hoax photo of low resolution to avoid all the hard work like the ATS guy from ILM did.  I have always been big on the shadows, you all probably already noticed.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 29, 2008, 01:48:10 AM
Ya know I'm gonna send off a link to some of the pics to Uncle George over at Skywalker Ranch and see what kind of response I can get from him if any. We at the 501st are pretty tight with Lucasfilm so if this is possibly a fake he will be interested, as he is very inquisitive, from what I could tell when meeting him and the way he approved of and scrutinized our costumes and their quality compared to his from the films. Maybe he'll throw this at his CG guys at ILM and see what happens. I have trouble believing that guy at ATS is actually from ILM.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: majicbar July 29, 2008, 04:10:46 AM
By the EXIF darta we are given the Rajmann1977 photos as having been taken at 17:42 or so. However the shadows to me have always looked like they we taken later. Remember that "Raj" said that he and his grilfriend were meeting at the parents house for dinner. Is it possible that "Rajmann1977" actually lived in Hawaii where there is a two hour difference and had he set up his camera to Hawaiian time? If so,then the EXIF data would represent the wrong solar time for the photographs.

Also given the nature of the lighting, if the Sun were later in the day then the incident light coming off concrete roadway at a glacing angle would not provide direct lighting but a more global glare from both above and below. (Note also in the "Chad" photographs that there is a large water tank on a concrete pad very close to the area of photograph scan 2 I think, which probably contributed to the lighting on those photographs as well.)

The lighting in CGI does not always utilize these lighting phenomena. Is there an area of Capitola which has mainly concrete paving, this tends not to be the case where powerpoles and cable are above ground on poles, but sometimes it is?
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: 10538 July 29, 2008, 06:17:23 AM
By the EXIF darta we are given the Rajmann1977 photos as having been taken at 17:42 or so. However the shadows to me have always looked like they we taken later. Remember that "Raj" said that he and his grilfriend were meeting at the parents house for dinner. Is it possible that "Rajmann1977" actually lived in Hawaii where there is a two hour difference and had he set up his camera to Hawaiian time? If so,then the EXIF data would represent the wrong solar time for the photographs.

Also given the nature of the lighting, if the Sun were later in the day then the incident light coming off concrete roadway at a glacing angle would not provide direct lighting but a more global glare from both above and below. (Note also in the "Chad" photographs that there is a large water tank on a concrete pad very close to the area of photograph scan 2 I think, which probably contributed to the lighting on those photographs as well.)

The lighting in CGI does not always utilize these lighting phenomena. Is there an area of Capitola which has mainly concrete paving, this tends not to be the case where powerpoles and cable are above ground on poles, but sometimes it is?

One thing to keep in mind is the time listed in the exif may not be correct.  Did Raj's inlaws remember to update the camera's time for daylight savings?  Is the pole perfectly upright or does it lean a little?  Also, bare in mind that Raj's brother inlaw most likely applied a color correction profile to the pictures that may help to compensate for lighting inadequacies.  The same may also be at play in the Chad pics.

: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 29, 2008, 06:20:40 AM
There is nothing wrong with the shadows and their is no missing shadow as is evidenced by a close look at the pole.  The "Simulation" is wrong in its sun angle.  This is easy to see, the sun is to the right (as looking at the photo) and somewhat low.  Parts of the pole have the same under-lighting as the Drone and on and on.  This is another Marvinesque tactic.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: majicbar July 29, 2008, 07:30:11 AM
Endzone, it would seem to be a good challenge for ILM to try and duplicate Rajmann1977's photo, this would provide us with all the relative lighting issues as they duplicate the photo, revealing what lighting fraction is direct and what is ambient reflection and the relative angles.

It would seem that using HPO's model could help pin down the sun angle-time also.

The camera time could simply be an issue of DST, but if an hour is not enough I still like the idea of the camera having come from Hawaii.

Does the camera auto update for DST, or is this a manual operation, anyone with a similar model?
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: tomi July 29, 2008, 10:17:04 AM
Fence is the expert here for electromagnetic radiation.  He would know far more about any of this than I could make a guess at.  But I did take some time to study a bit of this and from the double slit experiment to the black box radiation theory, there is little we know about how light actually behaves when it "hits the ground", so to speak.  It is reflected, it scatters, it is photons going all over the place and as soon as it is measured or observed it behaves differently! 

One of the basis of quantum effects that gives scientists the idea of multiple dimensions is how light behaves as a wave pattern until it is observed, then it reverts from producing a wave pattern to just single photons.  Fascinating..

So.. my point, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that without any ability to truly predict how light is going to behave in outside full sun conditions in any environment or upon any object such as this one, elevated very high with a lot of reflected light catching its underside, is very hard if not impossible to put into calculations that would be 100% realistic in a CGI program. 

Indeed, if in real life, this is hard to define and predict, how can it possibly be anything but best guess estimate and a refinement of software effects in CGI?
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 29, 2008, 12:11:13 PM
When I made the render below, I mimicked the light reflection from below by adding a little glow to the ground material properties in Vue6.
I also think Torvald didn't use the correct angle, it's not from dead ahead of the drone, but also in my render the angle is not correct.
I think numbers made a correct assumption in another topic that the black part on the "item15" piece of the drone is the shadow of the tip of the long arm. In fact in al the photo's where that black piece is vissible this might be the shadow of the arm. And we can use that to recreate the right angle, I still haven't done that because of the work on the physical drone.

(Click picture)

(http://i329.photobucket.com/albums/l380/HPO_2008/Raj_test04csmall.jpg) (http://www.hpaymans.demon.nl/Dronetest/Raj_test04c.jpg)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 29, 2008, 01:56:07 PM
So.. my point, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that without any ability to truly predict how light is going to behave in outside full sun conditions in any environment or upon any object such as this one, elevated very high with a lot of reflected light catching its underside, is very hard if not impossible to put into calculations that would be 100% realistic in a CGI program. 

Yes tomi you are right.  Reality can not be reduced to static calculations.  The Drone is startlingly correct in shadow and lighting based on the shadow and lighting of the pole.  This is why it appears so real, because all the conditions are acceptable to the mind as a real object in the environment, so maybe it is exactly what it appears to be.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: elevenaugust July 29, 2008, 04:09:31 PM
(http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/7788/fake19lc3.jpg)

Here's the fake re-creation from Kris/Saladfinger.
We can also see the same "missing shadows" as in Raj's photos and in HPO's rendering.
So what is presenting on OMF (torvald rendering) like sort of "definitive proof" could in fact only be either:
- Wrong drone angle
- or the rendering engine of both Kris and HPO is wrong and cannot make right shadows.... ::) ::)

What is the most plausible?? ;D
Can't wait to see the explanation....
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: spf33 July 29, 2008, 05:50:51 PM
- or the rendering engine of both Kris and HPO is wrong and cannot make right shadows.... ::) ::)

it all really depends on the lighting\shadow type used, might be a good idea to get each
to explain the exact lighting setup used;

hpo - software:solidworks render engine: vue6 (?)
kris - software:lightwave render engine:? (?)
torvald - software:? render engine:maxwell render engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_Render) (ray trace)
spf - software: 3ds max render engine: mental ray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_ray) (ray trace)

shadow types:
shadow mapping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_mapping), fast and less accurate
shadow volume (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_volume), another shadowing technique
ray casting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_casting), a slower technique often used in ray tracing
ray tracing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_tracing_%28graphics%29) capable of producing a very high degree of photorealism
photon mapping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_mapping), a much slower technique capable of very realistic lighting
radiosity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiosity), another very slow but very realistic technique


: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: BigFnTuna July 29, 2008, 06:52:09 PM
It seems to me that the angle Torvald has the drone at is wrong...

Do you mean a biased perspective ?

He has the tail of the drone basically pointing towards the ground, when I think it is pointing more towards the sky and the sun.  I think the drone is in a similar position as this Chad shot:

http://www.droneteam.com/history/chad/scannedimage-5.jpg (http://www.droneteam.com/history/chad/scannedimage-5.jpg)

And the angle of the sunlight hitting the inside of the drone seems too steep, like maybe he didn't account for DST.  Only my opinion though.

Tuna
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 29, 2008, 08:04:57 PM

hpo - software:solidworks render engine: vue6 (?)

Correction and addition:

hpo - software:Not the Solidworks render engine, but the Vue6 render engine (radiosity, Vue6 calls it Global radiosity)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 29, 2008, 08:36:29 PM
So.. my point, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that without any ability to truly predict how light is going to behave in outside full sun conditions in any environment or upon any object such as this one, elevated very high with a lot of reflected light catching its underside, is very hard if not impossible to put into calculations that would be 100% realistic in a CGI program. 

Yes tomi you are right.  Reality can not be reduced to static calculations.  The Drone is startlingly correct in shadow and lighting based on the shadow and lighting of the pole.  This is why it appears so real, because all the conditions are acceptable to the mind as a real object in the environment, so maybe it is exactly what it appears to be.
L E V I A T H A N

Yes in real life there is a real chaos of reflections of light from everything on everything, the closest thing would be with a HDRI render but even that can not get the right light reflections from everything in the enviroment on the drone, all of it has to be physically there IMHO.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 29, 2008, 08:45:54 PM
Which I feel is the reason CGI lighting is usually easier to spot. I totally agree, light is chaotic in nature. Ground reflections cannot be determined at the location they are all talking about at OMF without actually being there at that time of day with all the ground objects that were there at the time of the photo, including but not limited to car hoods, ground conditions, etc.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 29, 2008, 10:17:41 PM
I do not care which render engine they used, the sun angles are wrong and do not recreate the original scene.  How can it be created, not knowing what was there and this is what is being counted on. The original moment and all its conditions CAN NOT BE REPRODUCED only a facsimile can be reproduce an approximation of the real world event.  It would not hurt my feelings one bit if the OMFERs called it bunk and left the stage, but they demand that the posters here believe their false opinions and some of THEM know they are false and they laugh at all foolish enough to follow.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 29, 2008, 10:55:38 PM
While waiting for HPO's model to be finished ;), I propose you to:

  • 1- Read again what's have been said before on the possibly shadows inconsistencies on Raj's photos, and especially Spf33 great study here (http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=2037&page=1), and Torvald's works here (http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=2693&page=1), on OMF.
  • 2- In order to try to recreate the exact conditions of Raj's shoots last year, we need to know, HPO, the place were you lives and use to try your model, in order to gives you the same sun elevation and appropriate hours.

The problem is how to test it with the same pole configuration?
Maybe you will need to create a pole model? ;D
Any idea about his height?

The main problem, as we all know it, is this:
(http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/5341/shadows1go6.jpg)


But as for your questions, ....the place where I live,...hmm I don't know if I but that on a public forum  :-\ , but The Netherlands is just a small country anyway, so in the south part it is.

Creating a pole model  :D, that would be fun, but it will be very small then, and what about the camera setup with such a small thing? (the pole that is) Just let it float in the air near the camera on a long stick?

And what my biggest concern is, is to get the model high enough  ::) , so it catches enough ambient light but also have the abbility to adjust the pitch and the jaw.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: elevenaugust July 29, 2008, 11:21:57 PM
But as for your questions, ....the place where I live,...hmm I don't know if I but that on a public forum  :-\ , but The Netherlands is just a small country anyway, so in the south part it is.
Of course! ;)

Creating a pole model  :D, that would be fun, but it will be very small then, and what about the camera setup with such a small thing? Just let it float in the air near the camera on a long stick?
I guess it's probably the only solution, but I think it really depends of the relatives sizes of the drone/pole.
Anyway, probably some tests with only the drone for the moment could gives interesting results. :)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 30, 2008, 12:03:59 AM
The shadows and lighting on the pole can not be totally explained either and do we want to throw in subsurface scattering that is certainly present on things other than human flesh.  Why we can spend a year on that alone.  Who is it that knows the exact optical properties of the Drone construction material.  Remember the strange surface properties of the A1.  To reproduce something even close, one must know most if not all of the factors present in the original event and no one does.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: spf33 July 30, 2008, 12:07:49 AM
interested in hearing any more opinions on this, it doesn't get mentioned too often, but where is this blue
tinted highlight on the drone coming from when simply adjusting the brightness?

(http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6992/pict0016levelsbluedk6.th.jpg) (http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6992/pict0016levelsbluedk6.jpg)

is this evidence of a hoaxer using a blue colored light which doesn't seem to match the rest of the scene?  or is this
evidence of reflected blue tinted light from - a pool, the ocean, asphalt?  or is this a reflected non-colored light and the blue tint is actually the lightened missing shadow?

: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 30, 2008, 12:14:13 AM
Anyway, probably some tests with only the drone for the moment could gives interesting results. :)

Well something I already tested was the shadow projection of the arm on the item15, that one I can confirm !
But I had to do that with to hands so no pictures yet.
One thing I noticed with that test (and which is obvious when I think of it) when you bank the drone to the side where the item15 is attached, the shadow gets bigger (higher) on the item15. So when you look at Pict16 on how big the black shadow on it is, the drone does not only have a tilted position with the big arm upwards but also must have a substantial bank to that item15 side.

If I make myself clear enough  8)

(edit: put the word bank in it instead of tilt or jaw, makes more sense of course)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 30, 2008, 01:05:07 AM
I am currently reading up on EM and how it can affect light waves that strike it. Much like a prism affects light when struck by it. I am putting forth the theory that if the field intensity of the cage is such that it can affect light, it is therefore possible that the reason we see a shadow also besides angle in the torus is because of how the light striking the cage and it's possible EM field could be refracted and or canceled out entirely by that field.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 30, 2008, 02:56:40 AM
This very thing has been pointed out in the case of the Birmingham Drone and its ring anomaly.  The interior of the ring is lighter than the sky.
L E V I A T H A N
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 30, 2008, 04:03:25 AM
Ok here's a link to a flash file to show how the EM field refraction would work on the torus shadow.

http://www.swellcast.com/paranormal/sundrone2.html (http://www.swellcast.com/paranormal/sundrone2.html)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: majicbar July 30, 2008, 04:51:28 AM
I think that you should retitle the frame to read, shadow "inside" torus, as this is more precisely what you are showing.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Endzone July 30, 2008, 05:45:30 AM
Thanks didn't notice that!  8) 8) 8)
Fixed
 
http://www.swellcast.com/paranormal/sundrone2.html (http://www.swellcast.com/paranormal/sundrone2.html)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 30, 2008, 06:47:14 AM
interested in hearing any more opinions on this, it doesn't get mentioned too often, but where is this blue
tinted highlight on the drone coming from when simply adjusting the brightness?

(http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6992/pict0016levelsbluedk6.th.jpg) (http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6992/pict0016levelsbluedk6.jpg)

is this evidence of a hoaxer using a blue colored light which doesn't seem to match the rest of the scene?  or is this
evidence of reflected blue tinted light from - a pool, the ocean, asphalt?  or is this a reflected non-colored light and the blue tint is actually the lightened missing shadow?



Well if this was evidence of a hoaxer using a blue colored light, I think you would see that on more parts of the drone it's only on that quadrant, I would go for a reflected blue light.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: majicbar July 30, 2008, 08:37:22 AM
Do they have swimming pools in Capitola?
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: tomi July 30, 2008, 09:50:37 AM
Fellow DRT members, please help..
 
I'm pasteing here what I posted over on OM in a question to Jeddyih.
I'm sorry it is a long rambling post asking the same question tediously..

Here it is:

Where you see a shadow inconsistency on the pole, I see many as per my example of the pole vrs his illustration.

How can his illustration be correct if the shadows on the pole have so many inconsistencies to his illustration. I think his work and time is commendable, however, dragon says and I agree with him, to determine the correct angle of the sun, the shadow on the side of the pole would help determine angle.

Where there are shadows or shadows missing between his illustration of the pole and the original picture, is an indication that there is something wrong with the angle established by Torvald. Unless the angle of light is as exactly as it is in the pole, how can you begin to determine what is missing off the drone in the picture.

The only other possibility I see to resolve this shadow discrepency is that the pole is fake, it's shadows are fake and then the drone was dropped in as well. Now that solution would in my mind be ridiculous. Why create a cgi composition of a telephone pole when a photograph would work just as well, per this original picture. But to get the exact conditions to determine what is happening on the shadows of the drone, you have to first get the shadows exactly replicated on the pole.

Reflective light and the elevation of the pole has left certain shadows out of areas on the original pole. These shadows are in Torvalds illustration, and he says certain shadows are missing from the drone.

Sorry, but it doesn't make sense to me how you can attach importance to missing shadows on the drone when you can't provide a replication of the shadows on the pole. If you can get the shadows on the pole with its ambient lighting replicated to the point where it matches the shadows on the photographed pole spot on, then say the drone is missing shadows, I would say that is a cause for determining something is wrong with the shadows of the drone.. but until the shadows can be matched, it says to me it is not an accuate means of identifying missing shadows.

Please help me see where I may be wrong here in my reasoning.

Here is my example I made yesterday to show these inconsistent shadows:

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8172/torvaldexp1ts1.jpg

Thanks for anyones help here.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: drewlac July 30, 2008, 02:52:27 PM
Shouldn't focus on shadow studies be on confirmed locations?  Until details of Raj's photo location is known, these shadow studies are based on assumptions.  Hopefully the PIs will track down this telephone pole soon and then all of the conditions of the location will be known.  The one thing I have learned while watching all of this unfold, is that things aren't always what they initially appear to be. Just a few examples off the top of my head to get my point across: mouse that turned into a house, speculated damaged part in Isaac's inventory photo shown not to be damaged by HPO's model.  There could very well be something that is currently unknown about Raj's photo location that would alter this analysis.  Until location details are validated, we need to remind ourselves that this analysis is based upon assumptions. 

: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 30, 2008, 03:29:24 PM
drewlac, logical and correct.  I see many inconsistencies on the pole, showing the phenomena we call light at work.
IC
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: tomi July 30, 2008, 05:23:42 PM
Here is something I created to study the interior depth difference within the torus of the drones and shadow issues.

(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/4899/basetorusbn8.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: spf33 July 30, 2008, 05:26:04 PM
Well if this was evidence of a hoaxer using a blue colored light, I think you would see that on more parts of the drone it's only on that quadrant, I would go for a reflected blue light.

unless it was a spotlight using falloff and attenuation then it would look similar to what's in pic16;

(http://www.ashlar.com/sections/support/articles/articles/lightning-photorealistic/angle-1.jpg)

i don't use colored spots all that much in max, i'd need to check, but using a colored light would result in the center cone of light tending to go towards white while the falloff edges go more towards the actual color chosen.  which is what kind of happens in pic16.


Do they have swimming pools in Capitola?

many.  and cars i thought to myself this morning as i noticed the low'ish sun reflecting off the windshield of jeep onto the side of a building.  i dont' know if it was a tinted window or not but the reflected light sure looked blueish...

(http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/light/rayOptics/reflection/r1.jpg)

simple java illustrates nicely. (http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/light/rayOptics/reflection/reflection2.html)

perhaps this in place of, or in combination with, my current hunch that the pic16 pole isn't perfectly straight and the allowable compass alignment shift possible.

: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 30, 2008, 07:10:27 PM
Yes, a blue colored spotlight as part of many other lights could be possible, he could have overseen that the light had a different color.
But using a spotlight in such a scene is a little odd IMHO. And most programs don't have a blue spotlight as standard, so he must have adjusted that himself.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO July 30, 2008, 07:14:56 PM
Here is something I created to study the interior depth difference within the torus of the drones and shadow issues.

(http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/4899/basetorusbn8.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

Hi tomi,.... funny, I came to a totally different conclusion, I think they are al the same, they seem to have a torus inside the main torus, that's the part I have named the inner core in my model.
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: leviathan July 31, 2008, 01:35:08 AM
Today my friends and I took a walk around what we call the farm.  We saw many anomalies that can not be readily explained as to light and shadow and photographed some.  So this latest business seems to us to be a tempest in a teapot.  If this can convince anyone that looks at nature that the Drones are CG because of this, then they need to take a walk and see that nature is unaware she is breaking the rules of CG renderers.  We mentioned this to nature and she seemed entirely indifferent to human rules.  She only shook a little and continued in her ways.
IC
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: Arkhangels August 08, 2008, 06:18:33 PM
HPO I have one question regarding your CGI (and the resin as well) model.
When you rendered the image below,
1- have you considered a possible 8º tilted arm? Or in your image the arm is straight in relation to the main torus?
2- how you disappeared with the shadow from the arm in that image? Or you didn't have to disappear with nothing because the arm does not cast a shadow in that render?


(http://www.hpaymans.demon.nl/Dronetest/Raj_test04c.jpg)

Regards
Ark
: Re: HPO model/Raj photos shadows study
: HPO August 08, 2008, 11:25:39 PM
I've counted two questions  ;D.

1- In the CGI it is straight, in which direction do you think it is tilted? are you refering to the chad drone pictures?

2- The shadow is on the main torus, only you don't see it because of the low angle of the sun.
    I'm also going to do the test with the shadows on the pole, Kris has send me his model of the pole, so I will test it with my model of the drone in Vue6.