It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Blatant tampering in London bomber CCTV frame (from ATSNN)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   
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

Related Thread:

here


[edit on 25-7-2005 by hypomonk]

[edit on 25-7-2005 by hypomonk]




posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   
There is a thread here with evidence suggesting the CCTV image of the 7/7 'Bombers' has been tampered with also.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   
My guess would be that perhaps experts tried to enhance the photo from the original so it could be viewed easier.

I see this as nothing out of the ordinary. Police around the world do it every day when trying to show bad photos to the general public.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   
To me it looks like his cap has highlights on the left AND right side of it. Thats inconsistant with being in the inside of the bus.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The artifacts you are talking about are comming up because his head is highlighted by the sunlight streaming in from the windows behind him. That is why it looks like his entire head was 'plopped' onto a body.

And, really, if they had someone in particular that they wanted to blame it on, why would they just do a crappy photoshop job and just drop the head in?

I mean, if you are citing a government conspiracy, you'd need to do a little more than 'this looks photoshopped'. I doubt that the 'vast evil shadow government' uses photoshop specifically and that they do such crap work that it'd be 'obviously fake', if they even existed that is. Certainly you'd need to site some sort of convicning evidence in order to be able to say that the frame is photoshopped. Also, we're talking about a single frame in a video series, so the whole thing'd have to be faked.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   
posted on 25-7-2005 at 07:46 AM
The artifacts you are talking about are comming up because his head is highlighted by the sunlight streaming in from the windows behind him. That is why it looks like his entire head was 'plopped' onto a body.

And, really, if they had someone in particular that they wanted to blame it on, why would they just do a crappy photoshop job and just drop the head in?

I mean, if you are citing a government conspiracy, you'd need to do a little more than 'this looks photoshopped'. I doubt that the 'vast evil shadow government' uses photoshop specifically and that they do such crap work that it'd be 'obviously fake', if they even existed that is. Certainly you'd need to site some sort of convicning evidence in order to be able to say that the frame is photoshopped. Also, we're talking about a single frame in a video series, so the whole thing'd have to be faked.

Have you seen the full video? Who has?

I mentioned nothing of a shadow government.

The initial reports of the first London bombings were that they were military grade explosived that went of nearly simultaneously. There were also "exercises" planned on the same day, in the exact locations. This information alone is enough for anyone to be skeptical of the "official explanation."

I'm not one to scream conspiracy at every questionable piece of "evidence", however.. TWO images of this man are of questionable validity. This photo, and the one in the related thread. What are the odds?




[edit on 25-7-2005 by hypomonk]



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
The odds are pretty good considering there's allways people questioning everything. You have presented nothing that indicates that this photo is faked. All that has been said is that it 'looks' photoshopped. You can not tell simply by looking at a realistic picture if it has been photoshopped or not, its not something that can be done by simply looking at it casually.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Please delete

[edit on 2005/7/25 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 03:38 PM
link   
The hard outer edges of the supposed bomber can be mistaken for a "photoshopped" job considering the intense natural light coming from the background.

The fishy part has me questioning why those intense outer edges remain consistent throughout the man's hat? That to me reeks of an altered picture.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   
To go thru so much trouble is just insane. Dear lord, it must be worth their efforts, I guess.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
This is hardly a news item, this is a discussion item and you already posted it in the thread mentioned above!

naughty naughty! LOL



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Cmon, do you think that if they were going to edit the picture they would do such a lousy job?



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Yeah I F'd up and submitted it as news. D'oh.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Perhaps the photo has been edited to remove passengers from the background?



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 07:27 PM
link   
personally i would like to see the actual cctv footage. not pictures, but footage. pictures are so easy manipulate. i don't see the harm in showing the public the video footage. they usually show the video footage on crimewatch uk of some guy running from a crime scene etc...they almost never just show just a picture.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 07:03 PM
link   
do the cameras take video or just timed snap shots? they might not have 24 frame a second recording.

the white fuzz around the jacket looks odd



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I argee there is something wrong with the picture, the lighting is wrong, the guy's cap has a blackish shadow line on the left side under and above his cap, the same line can be seen on his right shoulder. just reeks of PS.

Then again if anyone wanted to manipulate this picture, why not let a proffesional photoshopper do it, this looks like a 5 minute job.

edit: spelling
[edit on 28-7-2005 by XyZeR]

[edit on 28-7-2005 by XyZeR]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Its obvious.
The left part of his head and jacket would have been much darker, someone has gone over that area using the "lighten" tool, I can do it in paintshoppro in about 30 sec.

What its does is to better pull out the features of the face, and the style of the jacket, instead of having them hidden in the dark.

No conspiracy, just trying to help make the person easier to identify




top topics



 
0

log in

join