Time-Lapse of a Plane Crash Composite Photo Being Created in Photoshop

Think you’re good with Photoshop? Graphic designer Alexander Koshelkov created this amazing time-lapse video showing how he created an epic plane crash image in Photoshop using elements found in other photographs (e.g. freeways, an airplane, destroyed engines and cars). The project took Koshelkov nearly 4.5 hours and required 244 separate layers.

Here’s the final image (you can download it as a wallpaper here):

  • Matt Payne


  • Mansgame

    It’s good, but did he get permission from the original photographers before stealing their work?

  • Serge Khm

    Or maybe he used free(or bought) stock photos? Don’t be so hasty to call someone a thief.

  • Hans_vfx

    The smoke plume is obviously from the 1986 – Space Shuttle Challenger Accident. I’m going out on a limb here and thinking that the artist thought that the smoke trails just looked ‘cool’ – rather than properly considering the use of an image from an explosion that killed all seven NASA crew members.

  • Simon Meisinger

    oh shut up. it’s people like you who made the world what it is by calling taking things and make awesome stuff with them without doing any harm „stealing“

  • Mansgame

    It’s people like me who create original content without piggybacking on other people’s hard work. This is a photography site so I’m always going to be an advocate of the photographers.  What do you call using something that didn’t belong to you without giving any credit to the person who created it?  Can I use this guy’s work and add my own things to it and pass it off as my own?  Someone had to drive up to the crash site and take pictures with thousands of dollars of equipment.  Should they work for free?

    Oh, and you shut up :P

  • Mansgame

     It looks like he’s just using google map pictures for the freeway to me. 

  • Joshskierski

    Jeez, who cares. Good job, I guess?

  • Tarena


  • juepucta

    (stand by for the iranian or north korean news agencies to use the finished pic in a report saying they knocked down a plane or some crap)

  • Pavelrg

    do you really care about that? – he is showin his abilities not selling the images. so gay.

  • Lloyd Spencer

    It is pretty and it is very impressive. It is an illustration. The borrowings of various photos doesn’t justify calling it a photo. Not even a “composite photo”. 

    Impressive though it is there are many illustrators who could do that in 4.5 hours with pen and ink.

  • Gloria Hairston

    he is showin his abilities not selling the images. so gay.

  • Matthew Neumann

    Sorry how can you call it “not even a composite photo”?  That’s exactly what it is. 

  • Aus_Guy

    ‘So gay’. What are you? 12?

  • 9inchnail

    Or Israel claiming Iran shot down one of their planes. Time to bomb them back to the stone age.

  • 9inchnail

    He’s not making any money off this, he’s just showing off his skills. What’s your problem with that? I originally bought my first camera just because I wanted to take my own source material for Photoshop composites instead of using low res pics I’ve taken from the internet. I had been using pictures of other people for years. But just for fun, not to make money or a name for myself. Where is the harm in that?

     He might get sued by Lufthansa but that’s another story.

  • Aaron Weiss

    Just wanted to thank the artist for a brilliantly done video. It was really inspiring, and I love to get the insight as to how artists work;) And don’t let the controversy get you down man, your work is appreciated.

  • Spike

    Incredible! To see the amount of skill that went into this blows me away…really well done. Who really cares if you call it a composite photo, an illustration, or a shishkebab, 

    Picasso made art with wicker chair caning. Did he gave credit to the person who created the chair?Ignore the idiots, that piece of art is amazing.

  • VelazquezRosalie

    my roomate’s st ep-mot her brought ho me $1 3342 the previous mo nth. s he g ets pa id on the computer and bought a $369300 condo. All she did was get lucky and profit by the advice uncove red on this web page

    ⇛⇛⇛⇛► (Click On My Name For Link)

  • Bryan Peabody-Pumpernickel Gia

    You really dont understand copyright law, do you? 

  • SantoJang

    That might well be the most amazing thing I have ever seen! Dude should be working in Hollywood, if he isnt already lol.

  • Wesley

    nice but the scale is off. a747 is much bigger than how it’s presented here

  • TheMan

    Wow, there are some serious tight-asses on here.  Now we all know who to blame when TV commercials get taken off the air for being too sexy, and why they cannot have swearing in TV shows.

    You people are ridiculous.

  • A Photographer

    It doesn’t matter if he’s not making money off of it – you cannot take people’s images for your own personal use unless the owner of said photos gives you permission.

  • A Photographer

    Seriously – look up some copyright laws. It’s stealing unless they are purchased stock photos, his own or was given permission from the owner of every single photo.

  • Askil

    Seriously…….Alexander thinks just a little too much of himself.

  • Askil

    Just curious….how did the cop car get damaged when nothing has hit it? And he just happens to have his emerg lights on too right?

  • rbn

    Had he not used the contrail from the Challenger disaster, one of the most iconic images of our time, it might have been believable.

  • Goethe

    Hey Einstein, nothing in the image is real. Did you not watch the video???

  • Jessica Brookman @

    Google maps images aren’t protected or they’d literally have to get permission from every human on earth to film. 

  • Kritiq

     To all of the photographers who think this is stealing; next time you photograph a composition, if there’s a building that someone else designed, an automobile or bike that someone else built and designed, or a person that resides in the background not even as the main focal point, take a few dollars out of your pocket and sprinkle it around because someone else owns that shit and the world is not yours to photograph for profit. You guys have to relax, there’s 244 separate layers there with no DNA of the original in sight. Stop being insecure and go photograph some other cool stuff.

  • alshihmany

    thanks good point

  • Guest
    I’m just going to leave that there.  Make sure to read the part about “amount and substantiality.”  

  • Vano83

     All photos are from Alex,

  • Adam Cross

    of course you can – it’s called appropriation. You only have to look at Andy Warhol’s work for a perfect example.

  • Michal Dybowski


  • jkantor267

    One thing we know – Lufthansa is never going to hire him.

  • Fenix Fotography

    Are you aware that Andy Warhol was sued for nearly every one of those. He settled them all out of court for undisclosed, but likely quite hefty amounts. The recently settled lawsuits against Richard Prince show that you cant appropriate other photographers works.

  • Edac2

    Two things bother me. First, using the smoke trail from the Challenger explosion is a little insensitive. And second, the scale of the 747 compared to everything else looks a little small.

  • Fenix Fotography

    Of course Google maps images are protected by copyright. You need permission from people to use an image in a commercial advertising image. Editorial images don’t require a model release. Copyright, which belongs to the photographer, is a completely different issue than Rights to Publicity (which don’t exist in most states) Rights to Privacy, and Defamation, which are rights belonging to subjects.