posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 11:22 PM
There's a considerable amout of post-processing evident here.
For starters, there are huge areas of pixels with the precise RGB value of 22-22-22. That doesn't happen in nature, and indicates digital image
processing if not outright cut-n-paste. I've raised the 22-valued pixels -- and just those -- to 200 so you can see what I mean:
Ok, so maybe the 22-22-22 areas were just below the threshold exposure and subsequent processing brought the base exposure for the image up to the 22
mark? Nope, because there are still quite a few pixels with values below that:
Then there's the dark ring arount the "alien"; it's an indication of cut-n-past, also:
Actually, I think the original image is of a very terrestrial young lady.
EDIT: Added explaination of 200-value pixels.
AND: As I was reviewing the post, my 16 year old daughter came by and gasped "DADdy!
You're looking at porn!"
"It's an alien, Sweetheart."
"No it's not, it a naked lady!"
She has the discerning eye of a true sceptic; I'm so proud of her.
[edit on 26-2-2006 by rand]