McLaren F1 car porn

[hurstg01]

flemke said:

hurstg01 said:

Here are some more of #018 and it's interior; one of my top 5 F1's

With a radio, no less!
The colour of the alcantara dash in the images is lighter than in real life. In real life, that white would have nearly blinded the driver. It was more a dark ecru, almost tan.

I thought the lighting might have altered the true colouring .

I too am not a fan of extra gadgets in the F1 [have you seen in real life #038, the Kandy Orange car that had what looked like every conceivable gadget added before DK bought it? ] - the radio is out of sync with the rest of the car. The look, colour and LM spec engine of the car are the main reasons why it's in my top 5, and the radio is part of the reason why it's not in my top 3

[Streetrod]

flemke said:

hurstg01 said:

Here are some more of #018 and it's interior; one of my top 5 F1's

With a radio, no less!

The colour of the alcantara dash in the images is lighter than in real life. In real life, that white would have nearly blinded the driver. It was more a dark ecru, almost tan.

Flemke, I am embarrassed to say this but I have I included your car in the pics on this thread as I don’t know what yours looks like?

[Ment-Al]

Theres a reason why these things are rarely photographed from the back...

Yack.

[flemke]

hurstg01 said:

I thought the lighting might have altered the true colouring .

I too am not a fan of extra gadgets in the F1 [have you seen in real life #038, the Kandy Orange car that had what looked like every conceivable gadget added before DK bought it? ] - the radio is out of sync with the rest of the car. The look, colour and LM spec engine of the car are the main reasons why it's in my top 5, and the radio is part of the reason why it's not in my top 3

I think I originally commented on the upper image, with its nearly-white dash.
The actual dash colour was close to the lower image.

I think I saw #038 a number of years ago, at the factory. In those days, owners were welcome to look around at Genesis, and one was free to check out other people's cars. Nowadays, the presence of the new project severely limits one's access.
As you suggest, the electronic gimmicks spoil the car. I saw one that had something like 4 added systems - AM/FM radio, car-to-car radio, something for the guy to communicate with his office, a little video screen, plus it may have had a radar detector. There were two gizmos under the dash, and two more in the storage areas under the seats. Lovely.

[pbirkett]

I like this pic, got it on my wall, framed!

[trackdemon]

Callan.T89 said:

but the Veyron is a masterpiece of engineering, a car that despite the law of diminishing returns still smashed the records of all that went before , and as an engineer I prefer it by miles and would take a Veyron over the Maclaren anyday.

Also the Maclaren would be pushed into third place on my priority list by the Ferrari F40, a supercar more focused than anything built before or since. Function creating form creating art.

I respect your sentiments re: the Veyron, but can't agree about the F40 - in engineering terms I think the F1 is simply the most focused road car ever made, assuming 'focused' is a synonymn for 'without compromise'.

[Civpilot]

pbirkett said:

I like this pic, got it on my wall, framed!

You do realise thats a photoshop?

As in the McLaren is superimposed on the picture to make it look like it's racing the Bug.

Proof?

Here's the original Veyron image before it was flipped and had the McLaren (badly IMHO) added into the shot...

[hurstg01]

some more porn

[pbirkett]

Civpilot said:

You do realise thats a photoshop?

No I didnt realise that.

But I still like it, so ner!

[Funk]

Civpilot said:

pbirkett said:

I like this pic, got it on my wall, framed!

You do realise thats a photoshop?

As in the McLaren is superimposed on the picture to make it look like it's racing the Bug.

Proof?

Here's the original Veyron image before it was flipped and had the McLaren (badly IMHO) added into the shot...

I'm going to suggest that you're wrong. For starters both Bugatti pics are LHD cars. Flipping it would make the one in the McLaren shot RHD.

Also this may help; if it's a photoshop, they went to a HUGE amount of trouble to do so - in fact, it would've just been easier to set up the shot.

[Joe911]

Looks like a (good) photoshop to me. Too many significant reference points that couldn't be replicated by chance. Much easier to photoshop than borrow a Bug and Mac at the same time!

[flemke]

Funk said:

Civpilot said:

pbirkett said:

I like this pic, got it on my wall, framed!

You do realise thats a photoshop?

As in the McLaren is superimposed on the picture to make it look like it's racing the Bug.

Proof?

Here's the original Veyron image before it was flipped and had the McLaren (badly IMHO) added into the shot...

I'm going to suggest that you're wrong. For starters both Bugatti pics are LHD cars. Flipping it would make the one in the McLaren shot RHD.

Also this may help; if it's a photoshop, they went to a HUGE amount of trouble to do so - in fact, it would've just been easier to set up the shot.

Good thinking, but why is there no reflection of the F1 in the Veyron's door? In fact, much of the reflection appears to be identical in the two images - it looks like a building of some sort.

Eta: perhaps the difference between the angle of the door, which is slightly backwards, and the angle of the panel ahead of rear wheel, which is slightly forwards, could account for the lack of a reflection of F1 itself. That doesn't explain, however, why there would be a virtually identical reflection of a building in both.

Edited by flemke on Wednesday 26th November 20:01

[Funk]

flemke said:

Funk said:

Civpilot said:

pbirkett said:

I like this pic, got it on my wall, framed!

You do realise thats a photoshop?

As in the McLaren is superimposed on the picture to make it look like it's racing the Bug.

Proof?

Here's the original Veyron image before it was flipped and had the McLaren (badly IMHO) added into the shot...

I'm going to suggest that you're wrong. For starters both Bugatti pics are LHD cars. Flipping it would make the one in the McLaren shot RHD.

Also this may help; if it's a photoshop, they went to a HUGE amount of trouble to do so - in fact, it would've just been easier to set up the shot.

Good thinking, but why is there no reflection of the F1 in the Veyron's door? In fact, much of the reflection appears to be identical in the two images - it looks like a building of some sort.

I would guess because the McLaren is quite short and the angle of reflection is fairly shallow. We can only see the McLaren on the parts of the Bugatti that are angled toward the camera, ie. the leading edge of the air scoop at the rear and the curve of the front bumper/wheelarch.

[flemke]

Funk said:

I would guess because the McLaren is quite short and the angle of reflection is fairly shallow. We can only see the McLaren on the parts of the Bugatti that are angled toward the camera, ie. the leading edge of the air scoop at the rear and the curve of the front bumper/wheelarch.

We crossed posts as I was editing mine to cover the point that you make, which is a fair one.
Nonetheless, how would we account for the reflection of the building?

[Funk]

flemke said:

Funk said:

I would guess because the McLaren is quite short and the angle of reflection is fairly shallow. We can only see the McLaren on the parts of the Bugatti that are angled toward the camera, ie. the leading edge of the air scoop at the rear and the curve of the front bumper/wheelarch.

We crossed posts as I was editing mine to cover the point that you make, which is a fair one.
Nonetheless, how would we account for the reflection of the building?

A good point.

I'd just toddled off to knock this up:



Assume the camera is the red dot. Now you've got me thinking though; the reflection in the door looks similar although the road surface is different. Is it inconceivable that the pics are the same car, taken on the same day at the same location? As mentioned earlier, the get-out seems to be that both pictures of the Bug show it as LHD. If it's a 'chop, then some serious work went into it.

[Joe911]

Just look at the trees by the Bug's haunches - compare the two photos - they are the same, right?

[Funk]

I have a funny feeling I may well be wrong..



Scaled and overlaid.



In which case, it's a VERY good photoshop in terms of the reflections etc!

Edited by Funk on Wednesday 26th November 20:23

[AdamT]

[quote=Funk Is it inconceivable that the pics are the same car, taken on the same day at the same location? As mentioned earlier, the get-out seems to be that both pictures of the Bug show it as LHD. If it's a 'chop, then some serious work went into it.
[/quote]

I'd say so, the Bugatti looks like it is on an autostrada (thanks to the guardrail and cypress trees), whereas the Mclaren looks like it was shot on an airfield in england, perhaps Bruntingthorpe.

Its a great photoshop,

best,
adam

[flemke]

Funk said:

I have a funny feeling I may well be wrong..



Scaled and overlaid.

However...
In the right-side image, that is the reflection of the F1's side strakes and C-pillar/rear quarter window.

[pbirkett]

Well bugger me backwards

I dont mind admitting it had me fooled. I still love the picture though.