Jobody's big thing !
If the picture is slow loading just scroll down and read about it
while waiting.
This has lead to much discussion amongst McMod list members which generaly went along the lines of Is it for real? Is it a photo manipulted image? Is it a physical mock up which doesn't run. Following are points from those discussions.
The conjecture:-
The front end is from a lateish 70's or early 80's brit. Probably a Triumph.
Not sure about the tank, but from what you can see of the seat/rear
end it looks similar era Triumph. Interestingly, the zener diode
regulator is still mounted to the front end, just under the
headlight. I'm sure that IF!! this thing was a goer, I wouldn't be
using an archaic 'Prince of Darkness' charging system.
Still and all, it's a crazy concept, and one that has kept us interested.
I reckon it doesn't matter whether it's real or digitally composed,
whoever conceived it deserves a hearty pat on the back.
Come on Joebody, 'fess up so we can all know who the deviant is!!
Cheers, Only Townsville.
I dunno. If indeed this monster is for real, I don't think it's ridable.
At a show in the 60s, I once saw a unicycle with a RUNNING V8. The
guy moved it around with an engine davit. He had a standing reward of
$1000 for anyone who could ride it. No takers, as far as I know. Even
I wasn't crazy enough to try it, and I can (or could, it's been some
years) ride a unicycle.
I think Joebody's rig is something along the same line. It probably
runs, but.....That front end looks mighty light to me.
filthy
I am quite sure it is a creation of photoshop.
Look carefully at the front wheel and forks. The forks are turned to almost 30 degrees right. From the width of that silly cylinder on the front, the front wheel would intersect it. Not possible in a physical model. Each piece of the bike is a real part, photographed separately or in a bunch (like the exhaust )
And it could even add the MISSING reflections in the headlight holder tubes and fender.
Another problem area, look at the amount of light on the lower exhaust pipes, compare it with the lighting on the other bits in the area. Lighting is hard to get right in doctored photos, this thing has problems in that area. Clear, distinct shadow under the bike and on the rider shows light from in front and above. Where is the shadow from the pipes? How about his leg?
Actually, it was probably done in Bryce or one of the more powerful programs.
I guess it would have taken a good user, 16 hour or so, given good
photos of all the parts to be montaged together and a good
motivation. MUCH less time than building the thing.
Consider the rider, his shin is the same length as his ENTIRE arm,
pretty unusual... The carbs look like a set off a 6 cyl jag,
including the manifold which goes down into the crankcase between the
V. Notice that where the detail is fairly realistic, the lighting is
good but where the detail is missing or should be obvious if it's
fake, it is very dark, almost black. It's a trick in retouching,
darken areas with bad or misleading detail. I just opened it in
photoshop, and enlarged it. It would be nice to find the original in
the magazine, to see if the smudges are artifacts of compression or
if they are evidence of computer fabrication as I maintain. More
light errors. Light in the bells of the carb is from level with the
carb and 45 degrees off the front yet there is no light source
visible in the tank reflection and the light on the rider is at a
different angle. Also, look at the bells, then look at the fins on
the mid bank, the light is different! Notice that where the detail is
fairly realistic, the lighting is good but where the detail is
missing or should be obvious if it's fake, it is very dark, almost
black. It's a trick in retouching, darken areas with bad or
misleading detail.
The parts were shot with differing light sources, it is a composite.
Bill Heckel
I'm not that familar with high end gaphics programs - but I still
think it is a physical machine - I agree it has been doctored up
later to give the dark areas to hide the obvious mistakes. The detail
of the motor / handlebar / jacket reflection in the tank does it for
me - plus the cheap mufflers ( and their brackets ).
It is possibly a "one sided" mockup - I could come at that.
Ian Drysdale
I'm forced to side with Ian this time Bill.
I don't see those lighting effects you refer to as abnormalities,
even the dark areas and other shadows look natural to me.
I own and use all the graphic programs you've mentioned, and I know
from experience that it would be a difficult task to achieve the same
look of realism as that in the photo without spending an inordinate
amount of time. I am referring to some of the same points Ian spoke
of. .....However, I guess we will never really know, unless Mr.
"Joebody" hisself wants to come forward with the facts.
BTW, anyone recognize the original bike chassis?
Steven A. Richmond Sr.
There's a copy of the photo on page 98 of the 22nd January 1999 issue
of 'Australian Motorcycle News' magazine.
AMCN apparently found the photo in the US magazine 'Cycle World'.
It was part of an advertisement for the cable network "Speedvision".
Cheers, Only Townsville.
Hi, just caught your picture of the V12 bike, this was used by a tyre
company in the 70's as a promo and the picture was used in their ads.
It didnt run and didnt need to as it was advertising tyres. I dont
think the triumph running gear would have stood up to the weight any way.
Keep on trucking, Jon
So where is the gear change and foot pegs ?
The pic is good for a chuckle and little else.
Ian. E-mail - meridian@access.net.au
Re: V12 bike - Think it was Avon Tyres promo mock up circa '78. Caption
read something like "It doesent matter how big your motor is if
your tyres
dont work'
Here is a link to another site which tries to find the truth about
this image
http://users.flnet.com/~wb9jtk/thesis/24CYLNDR.HTM
Well ? What is the truth ?
Send your comments to McMod