How Videos Are Faked On You Tube, (Excellent Job !)

[billt]

THE SHOT AS IT APPEARS

HOW THEY FAKED IT

[Hazcat]

THANK GOODNESS!

[fightingquaker13]

THANK GOODNESS!

I don't know, its a shame to see Darwin cheated.
FQ13

[billt]

I don't know, its a shame to see Darwin cheated.
FQ13

Actually, I thought the guys were pretty talented. I would have no idea how to pull something like that off. The only thing that I thought gave it away as a fake was if it were in fact a real shot with a .50 BMG as it appeared, the hydrostatic shock could have easily caved in his skull, helmet and all.  Bill T.

[fightingquaker13]

Actually, I thought the guys were pretty talented. I would have no idea how to pull something like that off. The only thing that I thought gave it away as a fake was if it were in fact a real shot with a .50 BMG as it appeared, the hydrostatic shock could have easily caved in his skull, helmet and all.  Bill T.

Actually, that would be video I'd want to watch. (Not the skull thing obviously). Its just that we hear a lot about "hydroststic shock". Well, really? What I would be interested in is two watermelons in a pile. Shoot the top one. Does the one under it explode? I'm thinking no. Now, if only we knew someone with a Barret and decent computer skills........
FQ13

[Sponsor]

[r_w]

That guy does AWESOME videos, watch his channel.  and most have the background how-to video on the special effects. 

[billt]

Its just that we hear a lot about "hydroststic shock". Well, really? What I would be interested in is two watermelons in a pile. Shoot the top one. Does the one under it explode? I'm thinking no. FQ13

Here is a picture in a Peterson publication called "Magnum Rifles" from 1980 that shows a paint can sitting on a 2 X 4 that was shot with a .375 H&H Magnum. The hydrostatic shock was enough to break the 2 X 4 underneath the can. This is a scan job of the page containing the photograph. (Top left 2 photos). A .50 BMG would have been more profound.  Bill T.

[PegLeg45]

I think the hydrostatic shock has a lot to do with the material being shot and how long it takes (along with the pressure required) to rupture the outer wall of the item. The paint can created a higher amount of shock because it took more pressure to rupture the can wall than what would be required to rupture a melon.
Just for giggles, I would also like to see a comparison of different items being shot.

[billt]

When you displace liquid it does not compress. Regardless if it's watermelon, paint, or human tissue. That energy has to be transferred somewhere. It is all based on the basic principal of hydraulics. A 200 pound NASCAR tire changer hanging on the end of a jack can lift a 3,000 pound car in 2 pulls on the handle. All hydraulics. It isn't so far fetched if you think about it.  Bill T.

[Solus]

hmmmm...

In the paint can, the lid would give first and the greatest release of pressure would be upward.  This, in turn, would cause and equal and opposite reaction downward, breaking the 2x4.

With a watermelon, there would more likely be less directed pressure so what was underneath might not receive the same force.

Maybe?