What's Wrong With This Picture?

FISMA

I remember seeing the Bourne Supremacy and noting that in the scene when Bourne is glassing Pamela Landy's Berlin office (that famous - she's right next to you line) the knobs on his scope are rotated 90degrees out of what they should be.

I figured it was a movie gaffe, however, then in the poster - same deal. Doubtful that it was a double mistake, how common is such a setup and where/when have you come across it?

FWIW, it does seem more intuitive to have the elevation on the side and windage at the top. Imagine having knobs that were fixed and could not rotate. An actual attempt to twist the top knob would actually cause windage to be adjusted, not elevation, as most setups.

Anyhow, been thinking about this one and here's the only conclusion/rationale I can come up with. Indeed, I am actually now thinking about throwing on some target knobs and using the above setup.

This setup is perfect IF you have a rangefinder integrated in the scope or a buddy calling off distances.

For example, with the setup shown: RH rifle, RH dominant, Right eye dominant, the shooter can stay on trigger, on glass, and with the left hand make adjustments to the reticle.

One question for ye lads: with respect to the scope - do you set it and forget it or do you set it and then click in the field after determining distance?

I tend to zero at 200ya and forget it. Haven't had much luck with adjustments on the fly.

Sparks

The picture in the poster doesn't match the film at all, I think it's a different still image taken specially for the poster (notice how the poster barrel is fluted, which the film barrel isn't) and possibly they did a left-to-right flip on it. The scope on his rifle in the film seems to have turrets on both sides:





The rifle, incidentally, is a bit interesting - it was probably built for the movie by a gunsmith.

bazza888

do some scopes not have 3 nobs one either sideand one on top?

FISMA

True, scopes can have 3 or 4 turrets. Parallax and illumination I guess.

Could it be that the RHS turret is screened due to the angle of the shot in the poster and that there are three turrets?

If you have the DVD go
48:33 - big clunky turret on RHS (wrt shooter)
48:48 - turrets on top and RHS, usual setup. There is a label on LHS, definitely not a turret like the others.
49:36 - Sparks' second image - Clearly a Zeiss, cannot make out the model, does look as if what is on the LHS is a turret.

Can anyone ID the scope?

If you have a Zeiss, do those angle markings appear on both windage and elevation?

Grizzly 45

Had a look at the German website Re the rifle it is a Keppler design KSII designed as a sniper rifle.overall length of 3ft7ins. 7lug bolt .The scope is offset mount,rifle is a frame design with a side mounted mag and it is convertible from right to left.No calibre or price.

The scope is a varible power Zeiss as well.You can see the adjuster ring pip in the closeup pic. Would think three things here.
1] Subtle advert for Zeiss in the closeup shot [ala the James Bond movie selling technique]
2]Flip shot of the scope.and /or change of the offset scope mount making it look like there are three turrets?
3]Doubt it is an illumination switch.Zeiss aSFIK didnt make one until recently,like in the last two years.

Rovi

Just to go back to the poster for a moment, 'informed opinion' on t'internet seems to be that it's a Blaser R93 LS2.

I suspect Photoshop shenanigans with the scope.
Here's a high-res version:


While many tacticool scopes have three turrets (parallax adjustment being the one on the left), they're always (afaik) 'tall' externally adjustable ones, that scope appears to have low profile turret covers on it.

I STRONGLY suspect that an artiste somewhere decided that the scope looked 'better' that way, along with the reticle visible in the objective lens.

Tackleberrywho

Rovi wrote: »

Just to go back to the poster for a moment, 'informed opinion' on t'internet seems to be that it's a Blaser R93 LS2.

I suspect Photoshop shenanigans with the scope.
Here's a high-res version:


While many tacticool scopes have three turrets (parallax adjustment being the one on the left), they're always (afaik) 'tall' externally adjustable ones, that scope appears to have low profile turret covers on it.

I STRONGLY suspect that an artiste somewhere decided that the scope looked 'better' that way, along with the reticle visible in the objective lens.

I concur, as the reticle is a stero typical one.

If it was accurate a bullet drop reticle or some other tactical reticle would be used eg


http://nightforceoptics.com/nightforcescopes/NP-1RR-15x_copy.pdf

Traumadoc

RTE one , now

Sparks

No tv, ever

dCorbus

Oddly enough, one of my buddies was the supervising art director on the Bourne Ultimatum - so I've asked him to check this out for us - He's going to ask the guy who was in charge of the gadgets on the Bourne movies what the story is. So, as soon as I hear back, I'll let you know "straight from the horses mouth".

:cool:

Grizzly 45

It looks like a Blaser all right on the Movie poster,but it certainly isnt one in the film.But that can happen quite abit in the movies.There is the famous Pinewood studio picture of Sean Connery in the traditional Bond pose holding a Diana air pistol!!!When it is a given Bond used a Walther PPK[well most of the time].Reason ,when that pic was taken in the late 50s there wernt that many realistic prop guns.So you used whatever looked good,cool and modern.Ergo a 30 year old air pistol.
By the time the film came out[Think it was either from Russia with love or Doctor No]The modified blank firing PPK had arrived to Geffory Bothryood to "arm 007"
So it is quite possible they started out with the idea of the Blaser,and then somone saw a "cooler" Keppler rifle and wanted that in the film. Be really intresting to hear DCorbus friend story on this..

pedroeibar1

Sparks wrote: »

The picture in the poster doesn't match the film at all, I think it's a different still image taken specially for the poster .....

Simple answer - it is a simple printing error - the poster was printed from a reversed image. Happens all the time.
P.

Sparks

Pretty sure reversing the image wouldn't change the rifle in the photo there pedro