CCTV Image of 7/7 'Bombers' has been Doctored?

What is this picture?




Is it somekind of sketch or just another version of the original picture to see the outlines?

If this is an outline version for the original picture, you can clearly see the rail outline going through guy's head...

Anyone else payed attention to THIS picture?

Originally posted by pantha
I'm no expert with images , so all I did was to save it to my pictures and then zoom in via the windows picture and fax viewer to see the image close up without it pixelating , I then did a print screen and paste to paint for my close up

Aw, c'mon. That's too simple. You should've said something about writing your own photoshop filter that increases picture resolution and detail regardless of the original picture's quality, and doing so for this particular thread within the time it started until the time you posted. Tsk, tsk, tsk...

is this the close up you're asking for?

Yes, it is, but it's still not much help unfortunately. I don't know what's up--I guess my eyes aren't as good as I used to think they were. Thanks anyways though, I appreciate it.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
how can we even stop to think for a moment that someone had the brains, resources and motives to carry out an act of violence without blair and bush being behind it ? I mean those arabs aren't smart enought to do something like this on their own, and there's no way they could hate the UK or US that much right ?

Taking a wild guess at this being sarcastic, this (and a similar thread regarding the "New York" jersey) would, if proven fishy, show that something funny is going on behind the scenes. This is entirely different than just sitting there and saying "Bush and Blair are behind it because there was the G8 meeting and Lodon got the Olympics and blah blah blah." In fact, unless I missed something, no one was pointing any fingers at any person in particular, everyone was just wondering what was up with this picture. Even if it's just a lack of resolution on the camera, it still looks like something screwy is going on.

EDIT: forgot to cite syrinx.

[edit on 7/25/2005 by MCory1]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by MERC
Yes, i can see the reflections, but what about the stinking bars in front of his lower body and face? How are they explained by a reflection?

There are no bars in front of his lower body, look at my animated GIF. You see his elbow, then the edge glass facade right behind.

As for the face, this is a digital image from a low-res camera. A hot-spot on his face makes it seem similar to the railing behind him. It's so pixilated, you can't tell much more than that. But given the rest of the picture (reflections, edge of building, distance of building, elbow) it all supports 4 people in-frame.

I think I can see what you mean about the arm and the facade behind it, it looks like you are right.

I'm not sure about the head still though, something isn't right, it looks #ed to me, but i don't know so much about Pictures. Do you think this image has been faked?



Or do you think it just looks more conclusive than it is.

I posted this in another thread:

I saw what you meant but on further inspection I noticed the following.
You also have to bear in mind that this is low-res, poor quality CCTV footage and it's awful when trying to use it for anything.




1. The bar going through the man's head - well if you look the artifact carries on along into the other mans head, it looks like the lines you get when you play a video back, just a normal viedo artifact. If it's digital it may be due to the compression, I know there are a at least some members on the board that know a lot more about these things than me so maybe one of them could comment.

2) If he is holding his hands like the man in front of him then it makes sense. At first it looks like it is going infront of the man's coat, until you follow the line up and see it is actually the line of the building. Which the rail IS in front of.
As the picture quality is a bit grey and low res and his coat looks similar in colour to the building it creates this illusion.

No matter how I play with the levels, sharpening, contrast or whatever on this image, it seems to clearly show a face.





The "bar through the head" appearance on this image is simply the result of pixelation, restricted levels, and what's called "blooming" where brighter pixels will "bleed" across darker colors.





The reflection of the bar can clearly be seen in the glass, but since the bar is so close to the glass, the distance between the two is small.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I posted this in another thread:

I saw what you meant but on further inspection I noticed the following.
You also have to bear in mind that this is low-res, poor quality CCTV footage and it's awful when trying to use it for anything.




1. The bar going through the man's head - well if you look the artifact carries on along into the other mans head, it looks like the lines you get when you play a video back, just a normal viedo artifact. If it's digital it may be due to the compression, I know there are a at least some members on the board that know a lot more about these things than me so maybe one of them could comment.

2) If he is holding his hands like the man in front of him then it makes sense. At first it looks like it is going infront of the man's coat, until you follow the line up and see it is actually the line of the building. Which the rail IS in front of.
As the picture quality is a bit grey and low res and his coat looks similar in colour to the building it creates this illusion.

Nice Diagram, thanks, I hadn't seen you post it in another thread.

Skeptic Overlord pointed out the most of the things you have said, and it would seem that you are both correct, especially about the arm, but I still think even with your diagram that there is something wrong with the top bar on those railings.


[edit on 023131p://37072 by MERC]

WCIP, can I ask why the lower res version with the apparent errors is being circulated instead of the nicer high res version that has just been hidden away in the links at the bottom of wikipedia? They even use the low res one for their initial article, and so do all the other News agencies, why? Why, if it's going to arouse suspicions like that?

[edit on 023131p://42072 by MERC]

No worries, I must admit that even though I've been desperately trying to defend the official line (someone has to to keep things in perspective) when I first saw this 'problem' it worried me for about half an hour before I looked properly.

All I can really say is that even though it is weird, looking at it the way I did and having to work with crap CCTV myself sometimes you can get weird little descrepancies like that..

And that's all I can say to be honest!

Originally posted by MERC
Skeptic Overlord pointed out the most of the things you have said, and it would seem that you are both correct, especially about the arm, but I still think even with your diagram that there is something wrong with the top bar on those railings.


[edit on 023131p://37072 by MERC]

Oh just found his posts at the beginning, hadn't read through first to be honest! Sorry about that!
Here is the link to my original post as well for reference, second from bottom:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by MERC
WCIP, can I ask why the lower res version with the apparent errors is being circulated instead of the nicer high res version that has just been hidden away in the links at the bottom of wikipedia? They even use the low res one for their initial article, and so do all the other News agencies, why? Why, if it's going to arouse suspicions like that?

[edit on 023131p://42072 by MERC]

To be honest most of the media arn't the sharpest tools in the box as it is, so they probably didn't think of it like that.
The compressed version is more likely to be circulated for the sake of convenience and in the rush of the moment people don't bother about details like that.
You've got to remember that a high proportion of the public won't even notice or think to look at things like that, and what sticks out to one person is background information to another. Most people arn't looking for a conspiracy so they just don't see it.

It's like when you jmulbe ltrtees up the brain still understands becasue it only really looks at the beginning and the end, and as long as the middle is about right then that's just dandy!

But if you want a conspiracy, and looking at how the media behave it may be closer to the truth than intended, they may want to arouse suspicion and fear.
The media is the most powerful 'body' on the planet, they can make and break governments, arouse emotions, create fears.
The media is looked upon as a mere voice when really it is a powerful mind in it's own.

Take a look at the picture below. Notice anything unusual? Now I am not a video/photo analyst by any stretch of the imagination, but I've done extensive Photoshop work, and there is obviously something very wrong with this frame grab.



This image, released last week of the supposed Hackney Road, Shoreditch Scotland Yard bomber just screams of a lousy Photoshop.

Take note of the unrealistic lighting, the rough, black edge around his white cap, and the inconsistent scanlines of different parts of the picture.

Personally, I think this whole ordeal just reeks of 9/11. Please discuss.


Related News Links:
www.gg2.net
www.eitb24.com
newsfromrussia.com

This got shot down, figured I'd post it again here.

I have done a little bit with photoshop, and I do agree with what our saying.
But also with my limited knowledge from CCTV I can kind of see that effect happening anyway, in a digital enviroment at least. I believe they use Digital CCTV on buses (and most places in fact) these days and the compresison causes oddities like that frequently.

Hopefully there is someone of expert status here that can confirm or deny this conclusively.

When this video was taken? Why the whole bus is empty? Is it usual? Or is it usual that 7:20 am there is only 4 guys at the picture?

[edit on 25-7-2005 by msdos464]

Originally posted by msdos464
When this video was taken? Why the whole bus is empty? Is it usual? Or is it usual that 7:20 am there is only 4 guys at the picture?

[edit on 25-7-2005 by msdos464]

Funnily enough I have actually been on the top deck of a bus by myself, and so have a lot of other people. Never mind anyone doing anything 'dodgy'.

And no, not really, there are not a lot of people around that early at most stations and funnily enough if a group of people turn up and go into the station as said group did, then (believe it or not) they appear as a group on the CCTV!

syrinx high priest:
of course they were doctored, tony blair and w are behind every act of violence or corruption on the planet, even tsunami's.

WOW! You are right! here is a link about the tsunami:
sf.indymedia.org...

it seems the normal colored cctv shot of the four men shows the railing very clearly going through his head. the brownish colored cctv doesn't. if you zoom in and use some of the artist effect on photoshop you can see the rail is clearly infront of the man's head:




question is: why would the put one person in to the cctv picture...does it mean that the other 3 were there??

Originally posted by shaunybaby
it seems the normal colored cctv shot of the four men shows the railing very clearly going through his head. the brownish colored cctv doesn't. if you zoom in and use some of the artist effect on photoshop you can see the rail is clearly infront of the man's head:




question is: why would the put one person in to the cctv picture...does it mean that the other 3 were there??

That version of the image certainly raises suspicions of mine, but photography is one topic I know nothing about.

I think wecomeinpeace has got it right.
I don't think there is a photoshop done on these images but the quality is certainly affecting the outcome.

As wecomeinpeace has shown, the bar running into his head is due to bleeding and blooming. His face is shaded and dark to begin with and for a limited quality camera and with jpeg compression, the most logical answer is that his face was near the colour of the bar and it's giving the illusion that his head isn't there.

I dont' see why they would fake these images so badly if they were to doctor them.

One thing i'd like is for actual video be released with images from video or if an image is colour/shade corrected then make it law/rule that it MUST be displayed with a note saying that it has been corrected from the orginal.

I don't see why they can't show the 5 second clips that these stills are from to help with body language and style? Releasing such limited shots with a lack of video makes you wonder how much help they actually want from the public??

like i said on a program in england called crimewatch they always show actual video footage of the people in question. they hardly ever just show a still picture....that's why conspiracy theorists are having a field day with these photos.

This thread is hilarious.

How could anyone 'accidentally' photoshop a rail through the guy's head??? It's in the background... you'd have to make a cutout in the foreground image for the rail to show.

Unless you can find a guy who already has a hole in his head..