> I am worried about a time when we do get a good quality photo, the hard part would become convincing everyone that it is a real photo and not cgi.
Perhaps corroboration, as video/camera ubiquity approaches. I'm encouraged by such things as the Chelyabinsk meteor [1] in 2013, or the impressive (and thankfully non-fatal) "Hollywood-style crash" in which a car seemingly takes flight over a highway in California earlier this month, and as covered by The Drive [2].
Yes, these things were either bright or in broad daylight, but might still have been CGI. It's the coverage by more than one independent recording device that provides evidence favouring real rather than faked footage.
Perhaps corroboration, as video/camera ubiquity approaches. I'm encouraged by such things as the Chelyabinsk meteor [1] in 2013, or the impressive (and thankfully non-fatal) "Hollywood-style crash" in which a car seemingly takes flight over a highway in California earlier this month, and as covered by The Drive [2].
Yes, these things were either bright or in broad daylight, but might still have been CGI. It's the coverage by more than one independent recording device that provides evidence favouring real rather than faked footage.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor
[2] https://www.thedrive.com/news/41623/speeding-camry-soars-ove...