| Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Joseph P Whistler - 9/11 WTC Photographer | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 24 2008, 10:44 AM (2,845 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Dec 24 2008, 10:44 AM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
Found on http://911digitalarchive.org/index.php Credited to Joseph P Whistler  Credited to Luke Cremin  Credited to Robert Fisch   Credited to Sal Pizzolato 
|
 
|
|
| thepye | Dec 24 2008, 03:48 PM Post #2 |
|
Why do i think the plane would be blurry if it was flying so fast? I guess that would depend on camera quality? |
 |
|
| Deleted User | Dec 25 2008, 09:41 AM Post #3 |
|
Deleted User
|
It would depend on the exposure, if the photographer was using a very fast shutter speed (which is usual in bright daylight) and had the camera on a tripod and was panning along with the plane it could be possible to get non blurry photos like these. But I assume all of this would require a knowledge of where the fast moving plane was coming from, either by sound (which is impossible if that meeting audio of the impact is genuine, no screaming engines, just impact sound and following explosion is captured) or by sight. Luke Cremins photo looks particularly faked, this image should have some sort of blurring in it. Imagine a photographer trying to capture speeding cars as they pass in front of him, unless the camera is trained on the cars and the camera is set to the fastest shutter speed, all you'd get is a blurry mess as the cars pass. Or if the photographer gets a clear shot of the moving car, the background will often be blurry (because the camera is moving and panning slightly as the car passes) the camera would have to move a bit to get the car as it flashes past. Luke Cremin's plane looks as if it's been cut out of a magazine and stuck on a photo of the towers. Another example is photographing a child on a swing, either you have to swing the camera with the movement of the swing, and get a clear image of the child and a blurry background, or you keep the camera still and the child is blurry. Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this, I take photos for a living but I'm not really into the technical side of things, I only have a really basic knowledge of how a camera actually works. |
|
|
|
| thepye | Dec 25 2008, 12:12 PM Post #4 |
|
If i was sitting in the stands of a baseball game, and i took a pic of a 98mph fastball, i doubt i would be able to see it cleary on the pic. It seems like none of the pics or vids are blurred. Reminds me of an Ed Wood movie. Bad special efffects. |
|
|
|
| shure | Dec 27 2008, 07:12 AM Post #5 |
Administrator
|
That ones new to me, it might be the weirdest one I've seen yet!!! |
|
|
|
| genghis6199 | Dec 27 2008, 07:45 AM Post #6 |
|
it's very two dimensional. someone has taken a straight up underbelly photo, and skewed it to suit the new perspective. as a result, the plane lacks width at the appropriate new side on view. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Dec 27 2008, 08:00 AM Post #7 |
|
Deleted User
|
here are another couple of fakes, this one features a mysterious shadowy figure on the side of a building.   Found at http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?categoryID=-1 |
|
|
|
| genghis6199 | Dec 27 2008, 09:39 AM Post #8 |
|
the plane is facing the wrong way in that second one!!!. i wonder if it's a photo of the circling elephant ? or just another bullshit fake? |
|
|
|
| RasgaSaias | Dec 27 2008, 12:13 PM Post #9 |
|
I think they're all pretty. Not a single one with excessive motion blur from someone scared or surprised for seeing a plane flying so low on Manhattan. Everything is shinny and clear. Thank you 9/11 photographers for the incredible photographic archive! |
|
|
|
| genghis6199 | Dec 27 2008, 11:28 PM Post #10 |
|
here's a good blog about the "flattened 175" type photos http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/10/mutant-tail-section-on-ua175.html looks very similar |
|
|
|
| JWhistler | Dec 15 2010, 08:44 PM Post #11 |
|
I have to ask the question if any of you were actually near WTC on 9/11? |
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Dec 16 2010, 03:14 AM Post #12 |
|
Welcome aboard, Mr Whistler! Are you the person who took the image below? Speaking only for myself, I was not in NYC on 9/11. I became interested in investigating 9/11 because the flight paths for the 2nd hit plane seemed contradictory. That aspect has been resolved. There are other issues remaining, however. I would like to encourage you to share your experiences of that day. I'm sure that Jeff would be willing to start a new thread for that purpose. Thank you for joining Pumpitout! Debs |
|
|
|
| shure | Dec 16 2010, 12:50 PM Post #13 |
|
Administrator
|
Thanks for posting. Fakery is foolish. I'm sure most others here would agree too. To answer your question, I have never been to New York myself, but there are a few people around here who were near the World Trade Center on 9/11. |
|
|
|
| beatprophet | Dec 16 2010, 02:12 PM Post #14 |
|
I was not in New York myself but all the paper was what I remember the most. United Airlines Flight 175 was the graetest destroyer of multi billion dollar corparation debt in the history of the human race. All those computers and files. Wiped out forever. Thats where the real profit came from. The loss of recorded debt. I'm sorry to the point of tears that all those people in the towers got involved in this. The twin towers were the centre of trade for the world. They came down for the benefit of MONEY! Burn the bastards in hell. One day they will be brought to justice. United airlines flight 175 the debt buster! |
|
|
|
| JWhistler | Dec 22 2010, 06:53 PM Post #15 |
|
Greetings: Yes, I took the picture. It isn't faked. I snapped the photo and watched the 100 souls on that plane vaporize. I don't know anything about government or wall street conspiracies, but I can tell you for a fact that a jet passenger plane slammed into that building and that photograph that I took has not been doctored or faked. What point would there be in that?? I'm not a forensic scientist either, but I really have to question your observation that the "...flight paths for the 2nd hit plane seemed contradictory. That aspect has been resolved. There are other issues remaining, however." What issues? I'm not sure that my experiences that day can add anything that hasn't already been analyzed ad nauseum. If there is anything, I'm willing to offer. Regards, Joe |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Drama Club · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
11:40 AM Jul 13