[vstar]

Audi R3 roadster or a Sky Photoshop job?

 

[1994SC2]

Someone was very bored at work today. Granted its well done, but it has PS written all over it.

 

[SkyBaby]

That looks good.... but needs some really cool fog lights down on the grille somewhere..... SkyBaby

 

[akinmb]

I doubt it's photoshopped, but it does look sick...that'll be an $80000 roadster.

 

[Temple]

It is not a photoshop and is a REAL concept. My guess on price would be around 55k to 60k.

 

[GetAboutRL]

I for one said "WoW' .... :thumbs:

 

[SteveR]

IF that ever becomes a real production car it might sway me to trade in the redline. That is awesome.

 

[1994SC2]

It is not a photoshop and is a REAL concept. My guess on price would be around 55k to 60k.

Though an Audi R3 concept car may exist, I still will stick strongly to the belief that the photo above is indeed a product of Photoshop.

Certain aspects of the car are probably real and influenced this renddering but there are WAY too many red herrings that those two cars never existed as you see in the image above ... tip offs such as the positioning and reflections of the car in the background which is basically just an inverted and doctored copy of the foreground car, the cartoonish look of the rear view, the overly detailed badging, and the fact that’s the same photo shoot as the Sky!!!! (Notice the ground and the mountains). It’s definately a doctored Sky, in my almost professional opinion.

It may one day be built just as we see in the picture above... but I don’t think you could drive what’s in the picture until someone gets it from PSD format to the road.

 

[vstar]

:agree: :agree: :agree:

 

[rick112]

The Sky with everything on the wish list. Except price!:lol:

 

[GetAboutRL]

I too believe it is a great photoshop job. But if it were available as a Red Line today ... I would be driving it home this afternoon.

Good .... I mean excellent job to whomever.!:thumbs:

 

[Temple]

My point is this is not something that someone put together bored at work one day. It is on other sites and there is a good chance that it will go into production. Word is that KTM will have there hand in it also...

Though an Audi R3 concept car may exist, I still will stick strongly to the belief that the photo above is indeed a product of Photoshop.

Certain aspects of the car are probably real and influenced this renddering but there are WAY too many red herrings that those two cars never existed as you see in the image above ... tip offs such as the positioning and reflections of the car in the background which is basically just an inverted and doctored copy of the foreground car, the cartoonish look of the rear view, the overly detailed badging, and the fact that’s the same photo shoot as the Sky!!!! (Notice the ground and the mountains). It’s definately a doctored Sky, in my almost professional opinion.

It may one day be built just as we see in the picture above... but I don’t think you could drive what’s in the picture until someone gets it from PSD format to the road.

 

[SkyMan 08]

My point is this is not something that someone put together bored at work one day. It is on other sites and there is a good chance that it will go into production. Word is that KTM will have there hand in it also...

Its just a photochop of a Sky, a very good one, just look at the tire treads, and the angles the wheels are turned, exactly the same if you flip the picture of the Sky... Someone is playing a big joke on alot of people with this... and to do it at the same place as the Sky picture was done would be too much of a co-winkydink....:jester:
where did you get your information.......Links please

Originally Posted by Temple
It is not a photoshop and is a REAL concept. My guess on price would be around 55k to 60k.

PS if you think that is real I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you...:jester:

 

[MonyGone]

PS if you think that is real I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you...:jester:

No, not Arizona...it's Colorado with the beachfront property! Arizona will be underwater according to a Geology Prof of mine as lectured many moons ago in college. 53,000 years is "short" in terms of geology and change!!! Hmmmm...will the insurance companies still be around to insure against storms and plate shifting???? lol

 

[JohnD]

FAKE! Definitive.

It comes down to this... Some of the angles on the car are identical - the bottom line under the air dam, the fender over the rear wheel, the alignment of the door...

BUT also, the car is lined up exactly the same on the pavement with the yellow stripes in exactly the same relationship to the car. And, check the notch in the hills, and the shadows over the driver side rear-view mirror. Exact.

So... If it IS an Audi, then it was photographed on the exact same spot as the SKY (unlikely) with the camera in the exact same spot as the one that took the picture of the SKY (unlikely) with the sun at exactly the same point in the sky to make the exact same shadows, which indicates the same time of day (unlikely) and the similar day of the year (unlikely.) Looks like the same weather, too.

As a result, the Photographer had to be EXCEPTIONAL to exactly replicate the background from the SKY publicity photos, and probably wait months for the conditions to be right to do so. If so, one must ask "Why?" Or, the photographer just happened to be exceptionally LUCKY to have karma set the car, camera and the planets in perfect alignment.

But better yet, the photo is reversed! The same shadows and all, but from the completely other side. So if the site is exactly the same, then the car was fitted with one of those new-fangled Euro license plates that read properly in your rear-view mirror, and somehow the publicity photo got reversed left-to-right when it was distributed.

Have we stretched this to breaking point yet? Perhaps there was no second photographer, and it's a Photochop. Looking at the abrupt, vertical cutoff of a shadow above the passenger rear view mirror makes it a dead give-away. Things have been moved around (like the side mirrors raised) and other things tweaked here and there. But when enlarged there are anomalies in and replications of the shadows as well as clear, vertical edit marks that can only indicate a Photochop.

If Reuters would only run it then we would know for sure that it was fake...

 

[Maverick]

No, not Arizona...it's Colorado with the beachfront property! Arizona will be underwater according to a Geology Prof of mine as lectured many moons ago in college. 53,000 years is "short" in terms of geology and change!!! Hmmmm...will the insurance companies still be around to insure against storms and plate shifting???? lol

Plate shifting maybe, but what about geomagnetic reversal?

 

[REDSKY]

Clear Photoshop Giveaways

From an expert...Yeah this is A PHOTOSHOP image!

Of the many things I found wrong a few are right infront of you...One of the TYPICAL things is to reverse the image....It was done! Then in the background the person reverses the other Audi...MAN it would have looked stupid if both had been facing the same direction dont you think?

One of the other things you look for is the use of the PHOTOSHOP TOOL called the "CLONE TOOL"...it is clearly used many times to create EXTRA MOUNTAINS that didn't exist or PAVEMENT that didn't exist before as well...I use the tool all the time when I make AVATARS for you guys! I highlighted the use of the Clone tool in the image below.

Plus if you look at the shadows under the front of the Audi IT'S THE SAME EXACT SHADOWS AS THE SKY IMAGE!

Don't get me wrong this is an excellent job well done...but what I don't understand is why did the person who did this make it so obvious with the BACKGROUND and PAVEMENT...The person could have taken the image of the SKY from that image, turned it into the AUDI and used a different background...instead the person must have farted out and said the HELL WITH IT!

Anyway Kudos to whom ever did it...job well done! :thumbs:

 

[marklynn70]

While it may be a fake it is a really cool car.

 

[richmcc]

It comes down to this... Some of the angles on the car are identical - the bottom line under the air dam, the fender over the rear wheel, the alignment of the door...

BUT also, the car is lined up exactly the same on the pavement with the yellow stripes in exactly the same relationship to the car. And, check the notch in the hills, and the shadows over the driver side rear-view mirror. Exact.

So... If it IS an Audi, then it was photographed on the exact same spot as the SKY (unlikely) with the camera in the exact same spot as the one that took the picture of the SKY (unlikely) with the sun at exactly the same point in the sky to make the exact same shadows, which indicates the same time of day (unlikely) and the similar day of the year (unlikely.) Looks like the same weather, too.

As a result, the Photographer had to be EXCEPTIONAL to exactly replicate the background from the SKY publicity photos, and probably wait months for the conditions to be right to do so. If so, one must ask "Why?" Or, the photographer just happened to be exceptionally LUCKY to have karma set the car, camera and the planets in perfect alignment.

But better yet, the photo is reversed! The same shadows and all, but from the completely other side. So if the site is exactly the same, then the car was fitted with one of those new-fangled Euro license plates that read properly in your rear-view mirror, and somehow the publicity photo got reversed left-to-right when it was distributed.

Have we stretched this to breaking point yet? Perhaps there was no second photographer, and it's a Photochop. Looking at the abrupt, vertical cutoff of a shadow above the passenger rear view mirror makes it a dead give-away. Things have been moved around (like the side mirrors raised) and other things tweaked here and there. But when enlarged there are anomalies in and replications of the shadows as well as clear, vertical edit marks that can only indicate a Photochop.

If Reuters would only run it then we would know for sure that it was fake...

It must be authentic, I heard Anne Coulter claimed to have driven one. I believe it was Bill O'Rielly that said it! :lol:

 

[MonyGone]

Plate shifting maybe, but what about geomagnetic reversal?

Hmmm. You made me go back to my books and "the net."

"Over very long periods, geomagnetic reversals seems to have occurred with a frequency of 1 to 5 events per million years; however, this duration is highly variable. During some periods of geologic time (e.g. Cretaceous long normal), the Earth's magnetic field is observed to maintain a single orientation for tens of millions of years. Other events seem to have occurred very rapidly, with more than one reversal in 50,000 years. The last reversal was the Brunhes-Matuyama reversal approximately 780,000 years ago. Scientific opinion is divided on what causes geomagnetic reversals. Many scientists believe that reversals are an inherent aspect of the dynamo theory of how the geomagnetic field is generated. In computer simulations, it is observed that magnetic field lines can sometimes become tangled and disorganized through the chaotic motions of liquid metal in the Earth's core.

In some simulations, this leads to an instability in which the magnetic field spontaneously flips over into the opposite orientation. This scenario is supported by observations of the solar magnetic field, which undergoes spontaneous reversals every 7-15 years (see: solar cycle). However, with the sun it is observed that the solar magnetic intensity greatly increases during a reversal, whereas all reversals on Earth seem to occur during periods of low field strength.

Present computational methods have used very strong simplifications in order to produce models that run to acceptable time scales for research programmes.

A minority opinion, held by such figures as Richard A. Muller, is that geomagnetic reversals are not spontaneous processes but rather triggered by external events which directly disrupt the flow in the Earth's core. Such processes may include the arrival of continental slabs carried down into the mantle by the action of plate tectonics at subduction zones, the initiation of new mantle plumes from the core-mantle boundary, and possibly mantle-core shear forces resulting from very large impact events. Supporters of this theory hold that any of these events could lead to a large scale disruption of the dynamo, effectively turning off the geomagnetic field. Since the field is stable in either the present North-South orientation or a reversed orientation, they propose that when the field recovers from such a disruption it spontaneously chooses one or the other state, such that a recovery is seen as a reversal in about half of all cases. Brief disruptions which do not result in reversal are also known and are called geomagnetic excursions."

/COLOR]