Exactly. You can't tell from the images whether that's exactly what people are looking at.

Let's see the colour originals. Bright yellow hi-vis jackets, beautiful blue sky, no one looking scared, running, or bashing each other, and no "Ooh, G20 protests - scary" undertone..

..and the perception will be very different.

There's lots of people, sure. There are far more people than that at Covent Garden on a Friday or Saturday evening. Whether they're 'spilling into the road' from somewhere else, cannot be determined from the photo, only from our imaginations.

In that second shot, there's no one fleeing. There's no one even running.

There's a girl looking over her shoulder pushing a bike. There's a girl looking back towards the crowd taking a photo. There's a guy looking over his shoulder with his hands in his pockets... hardly fleeing.

Blurred motion, off tilt capture - phooey.

Just photographic techniques that may or may not represent reality.

Oh get over it - it's not what you think.

I live in Twickenham.

Every few weeks, there's an international Rugby match, or a pop concert at the stadium.

Anything between 40-85,000 people descend, and for several hours before and after, the place is a nightmare. The police run a tight ship - you step out of line, you're in trouble. The rights of the residents are suspended (the roads are closed, and you just have to wait). Everything is about crowd-control - to stop it kicking off.

They do a fantastic job, keeping tens of thousands of pissed rugby fans in order, despite being outnumbered hundreds to one. I don't like it, but the cops are not pigs. They're keeping order, and from the occasional chats I've had with the apparently hard-nosed bastards looking intimidatingly at you, they're just ordinary guys, with an out-of-the-ordinary job to do.

No.

The monochrome rendition perverts the reality - it was a beautiful day, predominantly peaceful.

There were isolated disturbances, pockets of violence in the news, none of which appears in the images.

Our perception of threat and danger is not in the images, but in the way we relate them to the more dramatic news reports - which are not reflected in these pictures, except in our imagination.

Tabloid journalism this. Selective, suggestive; maybe valid as far as its subjectivity goes, but not representative.

Express, not Independent.

I've bought two of these from Amazon (not at the same time - they had them on offer at £181 last year for a while). Excellent price, identical to the AF-540 FGZ apart from the badge.

And the manual, which is (or was - I haven't looked at the new one's manual) a little light on detail, compared with the Pentax one.

Thanks for the elaboration, Dan - you got my meaning exactly.

It's only a bad photo in a rather limited and unhelpful sense.

It's extremely obvious on the 100% crop with my eyes/monitor combination.

I bet it would be too, on a decent sized print.

To lose the wing at the top of a turn means that he's already flying at a high angle of attack, with the consequently high g that snaps off the wing.

So the large force that's still on the other wing is likely to flick it instantly into a spin, which wouldn't be recoverable.

If by some miracle the wing came off without, somehow, the aircraft entering a spin, then conceivably, the application of enough power would get it into the stable state seen in the RC model video I posted.

This 'hanging on the prop' that people talk about is possible only when the thrust axis is vertical, which would not be possible with only one wing, which will inevitably tip the thrust to some angle off the vertical. As soon as this happens, the vertical component of the thrust will be nowhere near enough to hold the plane up, and lots of forward speed would be needed to provide enough additional lift from the fuselage to balance the weight.

RC models such as the one in the video have a much higher thrust to weight ratio than full size aeroplanes, so they can fly in knife edge with the prop pointing much more nearly vertically up than the full size one. The full size one, as I say, needs a lot more forward speed in knife edge flight, since it needs the lift off the fuselage.

All that forward speed would make getting back on to the ground safely extremely unlikely.

So for this to work for real requires the extremely unlikely avoidance of the spin, and also the extremely unlikely avoidance of a spectacular cartwheel on reaching the ground.

It just ain't gonna work, folks.

I like that very much.

Sharp but still fluffy, pastel yet still with interesting contrast, and somehow young but yet old.

Delightful. Don't give up.