# Harris/Walz "Missing" crowd in Reflection.

#### Mick West

Staff member

The above "Truth" from Donald Trump claims that a reflection should show the crowd. Firstly we know it's a real crowd from multiple other photos and videos, like:

But where's the crowd in the reflection? Here's a closer look:

Now it seems fair obvious what is going on - it's zoomed in, and the engine is curved, so we get a distorted image where the crowd is not very large.

That's a simple explanation, and partly correct, but it's not the whole story. Look at the location from above

the green box is where the camera is (somewhere in the hanger), I've marked the approximte angle of the plane, and we can see the reflection goes roughly to the other hanger, not the one with the crowd in it.

We can demonstrate this with this video:

Here the camera starts near the plane, but then turns and walks toward the crowd. At the end they pan around, and we see all the hangers.

From which we can make a panorama:

Notice a couple of things - the yellow building on the left and the two cherry pickers holding up the speakers next to it. This is actually what we see in the reflection.

The engine is curved so we have to warp it to get something approaching a fit, but you can see where it matches (photo flipped to correct mirroring)

There's still crowd over there, but see how vertically compressed and shrunk everything is, you can barely make out the car. The crowd is well behind that, and mostly off to the right (left, if unflipped). Remember the reflection is from much further back than the panorama.

Last edited:
Way ahead of me, I was still trying to find the Signature hangar at the airport..

I guess the Olympia hangar got some adjustments recently..

Hoping this is a joke. The curvature of the engine is not constant. At the front, the radius of the engine is smaller, so the curvature is higher and the distortion more pronounced. In the composite image, you can see how the right (formerly left) side of the Olympia hanger is shorter than the side closer to the Signature hanger.
A joke?

this is the "left" ie the other hangar on Google Earth

The 4 hangar complex, second from the left is the hangar the inside looking out photos are taken from:

This is the hangar on the day of the Harris arrival, it seems to have that front section added.

Last edited:
A joke?

this is the "left" ie the other hangar on Google Earth
I deleted that comment in the same minute that you replied. But if you want it to be un-deleted in your reply, I guess that's on me.

I deleted that comment. But if you want it to be un-deleted in your reply, I guess that's on me.
No worries, I just wanted to point out in case people thought Mick had the wrong hangar complex.

Last edited:
Chuck Callesto's claimed evidence posted by Mick in the OP:

The engine is curved so we have to warp it to get something approaching a fit, but you can see where it matches (photo flipped to correct mirroring)

There's still crowd over there, but see how vertically compressed and shrunk everything is, you can barely make out the car. The crowd is well behind that, and mostly off to the right (left, if unflipped). Remember the reflection is from much further back than the panorama.

Part of image posted By @TEEJ of Mr Trump disembarking, broadly equivalent to Mr Callesto's photo of Kamala Harris' plane

It's interesting (and informative) to discuss the exact mechanisms involved in the "missing Harris crowd" image.

But is there a consensus here that the Trump/ Callesto claim regarding the original photo has been debunked?
I know that's not how this forum works- it'd be much less interesting if we defined "what Metabunk believes" by vote, and it'd be a much more doctrinaire (and reduced, and I suspect less happy) place.
That said, it seems clear that the Trump/ Callesto claim, that a photo demonstrates there was no crowd to greet Kamala Harris, is comprehensively incorrect.

The "evidence" is largely based on the mistaken beliefs that a curved surface will show a very similar reflection to a flat surface, and that telephoto lenses give an easily understood indication of depth of visual field.

Has/ can the evidence collected by people here- particularly the photo of Trump, with no reflected crowd- be posted on Mr Trump's/ Callesto's social media feeds, with a non-partisan explanation? I don't use that type of media, so I don't know how it works. Even if it were possible, would it just be deleted?

Has/ can the evidence collected by people here- particularly the photo of Trump, with no reflected crowd- be posted on Mr Trump's/ Callesto's social media feeds, with a non-partisan explanation? I don't use that type of media, so I don't know how it works. Even if it were possible, would it just be deleted?

it might be deleted but cant hurt to try.
I wouldnt type any explanation, i would just post "Trumps Fayetteville Rally 2020" with the pic.

explanations are nice but most people can look for an explanation AFTER they see "oh weird, its the same on Trumps plane too". I think its kinda better if you let them look up or figure out the explanation for themselves.

But is there a consensus here that the Trump/ Callesto claim regarding the original photo has been debunked?
It's more of an "explained" than a debunked. in my opinion.

It's interesting (and informative) to discuss the exact mechanisms involved in the "missing Harris crowd" image.

But is there a consensus here that the Trump/ Callesto claim regarding the original photo has been debunked?
I know that's not how this forum works- it'd be much less interesting if we defined "what Metabunk believes" by vote, and it'd be a much more doctrinaire (and reduced, and I suspect less happy) place.
That said, it seems clear that the Trump/ Callesto claim, that a photo demonstrates there was no crowd to greet Kamala Harris, is comprehensively incorrect.

The "evidence" is largely based on the mistaken beliefs that a curved surface will show a very similar reflection to a flat surface, and that telephoto lenses give an easily understood indication of depth of visual field.
Watching the vid, and seeing the recognisable people and vehicles in the reflection move around, makes it 100% debunked. For example, I think in Mick's "engine is curved" image that you quote, the guy reflected in the engine is probably the MIB all the way off in the left corner of the image - I'd want to see them move together to be sure of course. Once you realise that the reflection of the crowd has to be above the reflection of the MIB's head/shoulder level, it's obvious that Mick's squished panorama interpretation is a good approximation to how things are.

Has/ can the evidence collected by people here- particularly the photo of Trump, with no reflected crowd- be posted on Mr Trump's/ Callesto's social media feeds, with a non-partisan explanation? I don't use that type of media, so I don't know how it works. Even if it were possible, would it just be deleted?

For the audience that is more fact-resistent, the analogy of the Trump photo might be the more convincing counter-argument to the bunk, rather than the physics. However, the truly fact-resistent, a trait that the group self-selects for, will reject even that.

For the audience that is more fact-resistent, the analogy of the Trump photo might be the more convincing counter-argument to the bunk, rather than the physics.
Mick's rushed explanation doesn't really help explain the "physics" to 90% of people who arent familiar with telephoto lenses, curved mirrors, etc.
It doesnt matter if you see secret service in the engine..she always has secret service when her plane lands. The question is whether there is a crowd that big reflected in the engine.

Just because you choose to believe Mick, despite his camera location estimate being wrong, and there in fact being a crowd in front of the other hangar too..

Mostly the angle and size of the people in the photo Mick squished doesnt make it super clear to people who haven't spent 10 years on MB studying planes and photography.
This is what the crowd looked like from the ladder at the tail end of the plane (vs harris' ladder in front of the wing)..the people at that distance are much much smaller than the people and signs in Mick's photo. That's the main reason we cant pick out people in the squished curved engine reflection.

i dont know how to warp properly in Gimp, but i added color coded dots to help outside readers better visualize the scene in the engine against my photo.

Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
659
Replies
20
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
217
Views
9K